Who shot Ashli Babbitt?

[gooddad409]

@WorldWatcher

@Cratic3947

@WorldWatcher

@Cratic3947

We know who murdered Ashli Babbitt. We just don’t know why he did it.

The person that effectively murder Ms. Babbitt did it to remain in power.

WW

I bet you never asked yourself why they shot this 14 year veteran of the Air force.

Video shows fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt in the Capitol - The Washington Post

Didn’t have to. From the video she presented a clear and present danger to law enforcement and civilians as she broke through the final law enforcement barricade leaving her just steps away from the House Chamber.

Capt. Byrd was a hero for holding the last blue line and for the self control to fire a single shot which ended the surge forward.

WW

■■■■■■■■■■■ the entire post.

[WorldWatcher]

@gooddad409

@WorldWatcher

@Cratic3947

@WorldWatcher

@Cratic3947

We know who murdered Ashli Babbitt. We just don’t know why he did it.

The person that effectively murder Ms. Babbitt did it to remain in power.

WW

I bet you never asked yourself why they shot this 14 year veteran of the Air force.

Video shows fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt in the Capitol - The Washington Post

Didn’t have to. From the video she presented a clear and present danger to law enforcement and civilians as she broke through the final law enforcement barricade leaving her just steps away from the House Chamber.

Capt. Byrd was a hero for holding the last blue line and for the self control to fire a single shot which ended the surge forward.

WW

■■■■■■■■■■■ the entire post.

I don’t agree with your opinion pertaining to a hero…

But I defend your right to be wrong.

WW

[Samm]

@tnt

@Steel-W0LF

@Samm

Oh, I get it. Shoot first and check her back pack for a bomb later. Yeah, that makes sense.

That’s exactly what the army is trained to do when guarding a restricted location.

I don’t really see how you can effectively guard something against that kind of attack without acting on some level of presumption.

The issue here is the use of lethal force in providing that protection. The law makes the level of presumption clear … “Imminent threat of death or grievous injury to self or others.”

[Samm]

@biggestal99

@Samm

Do you ever wonder why nobody here takes anything you say here seriously?

are you disputing that this is a losing case?

have you never heard of the doctrine of qualified immunity.

been around for quite some time.

Qualified immunity protects government officials. The suit was filed against the government, not an official. If the case had no standing it would have been thrown out.

A Jury will decide the merits, not you.

[Samm]

@FreeAndClear

I am not. He is a coward. He had options.

She was not a responsible person.

You saw the real tapes of her climbing through a window as part of a riot. You are trying to make her into a martyr for your cause. A hero. It’s a joke.

We have been over this many times. Climbing through a window inside a public building is not justification for shooting the person coming through. And neither is the irresponsibly of the person. There is only one justification for a police officer to use lethal force … imminent threat of life or grievous injury. No such threat was being made by Ashley Babbitt or any of the people she was with in that stairway. It was a “bad shoot” and you know it, so just stop with the silly excuses.

[Samm]

@Adam

@Cratic3947

@FreeAndClear

Didn’t say that. Don’t jump to conclusions What does her being a 14 year veteran have to do with her actions during the riot.

Why did you feel the need to add the length of her military career?

Because it shows she was a responsible person. I could see detaining her. But just shooting her like a dog? Pretend she was George Floyd for christ sake!!!..

Uhhhhh, not to speak ill of the dead, but Babbitt was anything but responsible. Do you know anything about her? She had some issues well before January 6th.

We can argue about responsibility forever and not get anywhere. But there is a bottom line.
What did she do that was so irresponsible that it warranted death?

[enki]

@Samm

Climbing through a window inside a public building is not justification for shooting the person coming through.

If she was alone and the only person trying to enter the room I would agree with you.

but she was not alone, she was part of a riotous group that was attempting to gain access to a secured location though force.

[tnt]

I think the capital police guidelines or code of conduct or whatever it might be called might say something different.

[Samm]

@WorldWatcher

@Cratic3947

@WorldWatcher

@Cratic3947

We know who murdered Ashli Babbitt. We just don’t know why he did it.

The person that effectively murder Ms. Babbitt did it to remain in power.

WW

I bet you never asked yourself why they shot this 14 year veteran of the Air force.

Video shows fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt in the Capitol - The Washington Post

Didn’t have to. From the video she presented a clear and present danger to law enforcement and civilians as she broke through the final law enforcement barricade leaving her just steps away from the House Chamber.

Capt. Byrd was a hero for holding the last blue line and for the self control to fire a single shot which ended the surge forward.

WW

Clear and present danger is not the criteria for the use of lethal force.

[Samm]

@WorldWatcher

@Cratic3947

@FreeAndClear

@Cratic3947

@WorldWatcher

@Cratic3947

We know who murdered Ashli Babbitt. We just don’t know why he did it.

The person that effectively murder Ms. Babbitt did it to remain in power.

WW

I bet you never asked yourself why they shot this 14 year veteran of the Air force.

What does her being a 14 year veteran have to do with her climbing through a window.

Oh, climbing through a window is a reason to shoot someone? My god what happened to the left…?

Someone climbing through a window at my house is going to be on the receiving end of my Browning Over/Under.

WW

We have been over this. There are different rules at your house. The reasonable presumption of imminent threat of death or injury is a given.

[Samm]

@enki

@Samm

Climbing through a window inside a public building is not justification for shooting the person coming through.

If she was alone and the only person trying to enter the room I would agree with you.

but she was not alone, she was part of a riotous group that was attempting to gain access to a secured location though force.

It doesn’t matter. There was no imminent threat to anyone. The proof is standing right in front of you … none of the police standing on the rioter’s side of the door were even roughed up, let alone threatened with death.

[PurpnGold]

@Samm

The reasonable presumption of imminent threat of death or injury is a given.

Byrd could reasonably expect imminent danger with a person while a gun was pointed at them and yelling STOP, was breaking through a window.

[Samm]

@tnt

I think the capital police guidelines or code of conduct or whatever it might be called might say something different.

What you think has no bearing on the letter of the law. The capital police are bound by the same law as other cops, which is the same law that you and I must follow to justify using lethal force (outside of our homes.)

[Samm]

@PurpnGold

@Samm

The reasonable presumption of imminent threat of death or injury is a given.

Byrd could reasonably expect imminent danger with a person while a gun was pointed at them and yelling STOP, was breaking through a window.

Desperation sets in.

[enki]

@Samm

@enki

@Samm

Climbing through a window inside a public building is not justification for shooting the person coming through.

If she was alone and the only person trying to enter the room I would agree with you.

but she was not alone, she was part of a riotous group that was attempting to gain access to a secured location though force.

It doesn’t matter. There was no imminent threat to anyone. The proof is standing right in front of you … none of the police standing on the rioter’s side of the door were even roughed up, let alone threatened with death.

it does matter. She was backed by a riotous mob using force to enter the room and gain access to the lawmakers inside.

it was foolish of all of them to think officers wouldn’t or could not use deadly force to protect the people inside.

[e7alr]

Which is why those official guidelines and policies will be exhibit one before any witnesses are even called. I would really like to have them to post and discuss, but I can’t find it on line.

[PurpnGold]

@Samm

@PurpnGold

@Samm

The reasonable presumption of imminent threat of death or injury is a given.

Byrd could reasonably expect imminent danger with a person while a gun was pointed at them and yelling STOP, was breaking through a window.

Desperation sets in.

The tough guy act isn’t going to work here.

In any other situation… you would think someone breaking through a window, with a violent mob behind… is an imminent danger… ESPECIALLY when that person continues to advance through the broken window while a gun is pointed at them.

[Samm]

@enki

@Samm

@enki

@Samm

Climbing through a window inside a public building is not justification for shooting the person coming through.

If she was alone and the only person trying to enter the room I would agree with you.

but she was not alone, she was part of a riotous group that was attempting to gain access to a secured location though force.

It doesn’t matter. There was no imminent threat to anyone. The proof is standing right in front of you … none of the police standing on the rioter’s side of the door were even roughed up, let alone threatened with death.

it does matter. She was backed by a riotous mob using force to enter the room and gain access to the lawmakers inside.

it was foolish of all of them to think officers wouldn’t or could not use deadly force to protect the people inside.

Just stop. The mob at that doorway was actively demonstrating that they were not threatening law officers. Now had they beaten those cops to a pulp and then tried coming through, you would have a valid point. But that did not happen … those cops were completely unmolested and Byrd had no reason to think they would change their behavior when on his side of the door.

[Munimula1]

In[quote=“Cratic3947, post:5184, topic:238029, full:true”]

@FreeAndClear

Didn’t say that. Don’t jump to conclusions What does her being a 14 year veteran have to do with her actions during the riot.

Why did you feel the need to add the length of her military career?

Because it shows she was a responsible person. I could see detaining her. But just shooting her like a dog? Pretend she was George Floyd for christ sake!!!..
[/quote]

She was a Qanon crackpot.

[Samm]

@PurpnGold

@Samm

@PurpnGold

@Samm

The reasonable presumption of imminent threat of death or injury is a given.

Byrd could reasonably expect imminent danger with a person while a gun was pointed at them and yelling STOP, was breaking through a window.

Desperation sets in.

The tough guy act isn’t going to work here.

In any other situation… you would think someone breaking through a window, with a violent mob behind… is an imminent danger… ESPECIALLY when that person continues to advance through the broken window while a gun is pointed at them.

Oh, so pointing a finger and laughing is being a “tough guy”? No wonder you think Byrd was justified in killing her.