Almost 140 serious injuries to Capitol Cops

[Faun]

So the only two choices were let her proceed or shoot her dead?

It wasn’t necessarily the only choice but it was probably a reasonable one.

A handful of officers were all that stood in between a violent mob and members of Congress whom they have a duty to protect.

This shouldn’t be controversial. If a horde of people were running through the White House and they were breaking into a door outside the Oval Office, no one would question secret service shooting someone.

It's amazing how far you will go to justify this woman dying because you hate her politics and you see her death as a political victory.

It's easy to justify. Imagine you're at home with your family. Your family is hiding behind you in a bedroom while you've got your gun trained on the door to that bedroom because a mob of people had broken into your house, could be heard chanting for the death of your family members, and were breaking in through your bedroom door which you barricaded as extra protection to keep them out. Suddenly, the door is broken down and the mob starts coming in. Tell me you wouldn't shoot the first person coming in....

In all likelihood, you would have already emptied your gun blindly through the door before they even break into your bedroom.

And if you killed any of them, you'd be facing no charges because it would be a justified shoot.

Two entirely different situations, and you ignore the fact that in your scenario other police officers would have been mixed in with the "mob"

Every time you try to justify this you have to get more and more retarded doing it.

Also, defense of one's home is a different circumstance than policing, and thus has different rules of use of deadly force.

Not entirely different in terms of it being a justified shoot.

100% different.

Nope, not entirely different. You just don't like hearing it in that perspective because you know what you would do. In both cases, a mob illegally breaks in. In both cases, said mobs threaten peoples' lives. In both cases, they break into where their potential victims are hiding. In both cases, people in the mob breaking in would be shot. In both cases, the shooter would not face charges because in both cases, it would be a justifiable shoot.

 

[colfax_m]

And they think they are winning this debate.

This is more fun now that the potus isn’t talking like them. Thank god we took our country back from the crazies who can’t see their hypocrisy and blatant double standards.

You can tell when they're "winning" when the arguments turn to vulgarity and profanity, especially with this guy. He isn't exactly the top brass among Trump supporters.

Surely he typed out this argument and hit submit knowing that the standards were different.

 

[Faun]

How many protesters were in that one hallway? How many officers were in that one hallway?

From the officers vantage point, it could have been dozens and dozens and dozens. He didn’t ask them for a head count. The officer knew hundreds of violent protestors were inside the Capitol. He knew that people were attacking officers.

So that means he was justified in shooting the one woman?

Really?

Try that at any other police interaction and see where that gets you.

He only had to shoot one person to keep the rest out. Had any others tried to gain access to the House chamber at that point, they too would have been shot.

And that isn't justification for a shooting by officers. "Pour encouragement les autres" is a soviet tactic, but not a viable police use of force explanation.

I didn't say that was justification. That was the result. The justification was protecting the lawmakers in the room behind him.

Which really doesn't justify deadly force against an unarmed woman trying to jump through a window.

So he should have just let her break in?

So the only two choices were let her proceed or shoot her dead?

They were already in, there were officers on her side of the barricade, and they didn't shoot anyone.

Your argument about other cops not shooting anyone is spurious. You don't know why they were there and you don't know if they knew there were still lawmakers in that chamber and you don't know if they didn't shoot anyone because the cops on the other side of that door were handling keeping the mob out of the chamber.

And the mob wasn't "already in there." They got as far a the entryway leading into the Speaker's Lobby which leads directly into the House chamber. It was the other side of that entryway which was barricaded with stacked furniture and armed police with guns drawn. Ashli Targetpractice ignored all that and got what she deserved. Poor thing. She once proudly served her nation but then dies a traitor.

it shows they didn't see a lethal threat to themselves.

All the rest is just you masturbating to the death of someone you hate politically, and is fucking sad.

You're an idiot, Marty. Politics have nothing to do with it. Sullivan was standing just a few feet away when that happened. Had he been the one shot while climbing through that broken out window, I'd still be calling it a justified shoot.

And it matter not if those cops didn't feel threatened. They weren't the ones blocking the doors leading into the House chamber. The cops who were, clearly felt an immediate lethal threat as they had their guns drawn.

Politics has everything to do with it for you, just like every other leftist.

Sorry, but your attempted justifications of this are just sad and pathetic, just like you.

I've already demonstrated you're an idiot about this. I need not do so again.

You haven't demonstrated anything but being a hack soi boi.

Of course I demonstrated it. If you're incapable of comprehending how I demonstrated it, that's on you.

I have no problem with that.

 

[Faun]

Actually they have to justify it, that's the whole concept of a "justified use of deadly force"

You getting a hard on over a political enemies death doesn't cut it.

Fair enough, I didn't use the right language.

The use of force is justified by the rational threat to the life and safety of the police and their protectees.

She's not my political enemy. She's a tragedy that is the result of years of indoctrination.

One woman hopping through a window, an unarmed woman is not a threat to life and safety.

The cops on the other side of the door in direct contact with the other people sure didn't think so.

One woman no but she was part of a mob. And she was the first crazy who poked her head in.

Keep justifying it in your addled mind, you soi boi cuck.

How is kamala's dildo doing widening your ass?

LOL

You reveal more about yourself than I suspect you intended.

 

[martybegan]

So the only two choices were let her proceed or shoot her dead?

It wasn’t necessarily the only choice but it was probably a reasonable one.

A handful of officers were all that stood in between a violent mob and members of Congress whom they have a duty to protect.

This shouldn’t be controversial. If a horde of people were running through the White House and they were breaking into a door outside the Oval Office, no one would question secret service shooting someone.

It's amazing how far you will go to justify this woman dying because you hate her politics and you see her death as a political victory.

Her death is a tragedy that could have been averted a million times before she decided to jump through a window.

I don’t have to justify it, but the facts are that it was almost certainly a rational action given the circumstances.

Actually they have to justify it, that's the whole concept of a "justified use of deadly force"

You getting a hard on over a political enemies death doesn't cut it.

And he did justify it which is why he's not been charged.

Investigation still ongoing, and I have a feeling it hasn't closed out because they know the shoot was bad.

Fuck your feelings; or so I hear.

Wrong type of feelings, you sjw cuck.

 

[martybegan]

He was known to have a knife, and he was going into his car where he could have had said knife.

Please show me where the woman was ever seen to be armed.

"Could have" is the standard for one person, "seen to be" is the standard for another.

Hmm, what could be the reason for such a double standard?

No double standard, two different situations you idiots are trying to meld into the same situation because you can't argue on the merits of your position regarding the capitol shooting.

 

[martybegan]

That has nothing to do with use of deadly force regulations.

Of course it does. Deadly force is justifiable based on the threat one faces.

It has to be a specific lethal threat or bodily harm threat.

20 black guys robbing a store and one tries to jump out a window towards a cop, the cop can shoot him to make sure the other guys know the cop means business?

No. He shoots the guy because he’s coming at the cop and presents an immediate threat to him.

Unarmed, going through a window is a threat? Coming from a room with far heavier armed police who aren't even aiming their weapons at the other people there?

You are using the "spaghetti on the wall" method of trying to argue this, just throwing things and seeing what sticks.

You talk about not being able to admit when a side is wrong, and you are doing just that right here.

Talk about fucking ignorant.

How was the cop supposed to know she was unarmed? And whether or not she was armed is irrelevant as she was part of a much bigger mob who were making their way through the Capitol, hunting for politicians to murder.

It's amazing how much goalpost moving you do to justify this.

She didn't have a weapon out at all, she could have easily been restrained while in the act of going through the door, and there were other officers there far more heavily armed amongst the crowd that didn't see the need to open fire.

And the more times goes on, the more the "looking for politicians to murder" bullshit gets debunked.

I've moved nothing, ya moron. My position has been solid since the details of her death first emerged.

And nothing's been debunked regarding the potential for murdering politicians. The mob is heard on video, calling to hang the VP.

So far the fire extinguisher hitting the cop who died has been debunked, and now it appears the "plastic handcuff" guy didn't bring them, but found them inside the building.

As for the chanting, I'm sure far more virulent things were chanted at BLM/Anti-fa protests, as well as direct threats at the officers and anyone not part of the protest, but of course you ignore that.

You're an idiot, Marty. The only one claiming Brock found those twist ties is Brock. And that's his defense against charges against him. Meanwhile, he wasn't the only one seen with twist ties and there were surveillance cameras everywhere. If he truly found them, that will likely be proven in court. But even then, that's not to say another insurrectionist that day didn't drop them.

As far as the chanting, it matters not what occurred at any other riots. That's irrelevant to this case and you only mention it to serve as a distraction. It has zero bearing on that mob calling for the death of the VPOTUS while they had the ability to carry that threat out.

So far no evidence has been shown him having them on his way in, and there were cameras fucking everywhere, it's the same issue they are having trying to find the phantom fire extinguisher strike on the dead officer.

It matters that you blow this out of proportion and take literal this chanting will dismissing the others as just rhetoric solely because it fits your narrative.

LOLOL

A mob breaks into the Capitol, beating police along the way. Trump tells the mob Pence wouldn't hand him the election. The members of the mob are heard calling Pence a traitor while others are heard calling for his death. And dumbfucks like you try to wash it all away as though they didn't really mean it.

You're a psychopath, Marty.

No, I just see through your pathetic veneer of outrage and see your true motive, political gain.

You guys want that woman to be a patriot when she was a traitor

No, she wasn't. at worst she was a vandal and a trespasser.

 

[martybegan]

How many protesters were in that one hallway? How many officers were in that one hallway?

From the officers vantage point, it could have been dozens and dozens and dozens. He didn’t ask them for a head count. The officer knew hundreds of violent protestors were inside the Capitol. He knew that people were attacking officers.

So that means he was justified in shooting the one woman?

Really?

Try that at any other police interaction and see where that gets you.

He only had to shoot one person to keep the rest out. Had any others tried to gain access to the House chamber at that point, they too would have been shot.

And that isn't justification for a shooting by officers. "Pour encouragement les autres" is a soviet tactic, but not a viable police use of force explanation.

I didn't say that was justification. That was the result. The justification was protecting the lawmakers in the room behind him.

Which really doesn't justify deadly force against an unarmed woman trying to jump through a window.

So he should have just let her break in?

So the only two choices were let her proceed or shoot her dead?

They were already in, there were officers on her side of the barricade, and they didn't shoot anyone.

Exactly
View attachment 458212

Wow, one picture with no context, what a fucking hack you are.

You know what that picture is. Cop told him to stop. He didn’t. He was just getting in his car. Cop shot him 7 times.

Or how about the 1000000 other incidents where you conservatives justify the cop shooting the black man because he didn’t obey the police lawful commands.

You can’t have this both ways. Sorry

He was known to have a knife, and he was going into his car where he could have had said knife.

Please show me where the woman was ever seen to be armed.

Show me he had a knife. He was “known to” have a knife? That’s justification? Well show me he had a knife. Why do I have to show you she had a knife but those cops don’t have to show us he had a knife?

So they had to see a knife on her but not on him.

If a knife less mob is attacking me I’m shooting them. They used fire extinguishers you idiot.

From wikipedia, highlighted part.

n a press conference on August 26, 2020, Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul said that a knife was recovered from the driver-side front floorboard of the car Blake was leaning into when he was shot in the back. Kaul also said that Blake told investigators that he had a knife, though Kaul declined to describe the knife or say whether it was related to the shooting; Blake's lawyer disputed that the knife was in his possession.[33] The prosecutor who oversaw the investigation said that Blake admitted to holding a knife and that officers and witnesses stated that Blake turned towards officer Sheskey with the knife immediately before the shooting.[34] Blake later admitted that he "wasn't thinking clearly" and picked up a knife during the altercation, although he denied having the intent to use it.[35]

 

[martybegan]

He was known to have a knife, and he was going into his car where he could have had said knife.

Please show me where the woman was ever seen to be armed.

"Could have" is the standard for one person, "seen to be" is the standard for another.

Hmm, what could be the reason for such a double standard?

And they think they are winning this debate.

This is more fun now that the potus isn’t talking like them. Thank god we took our country back from the crazies who can’t see their hypocrisy and blatant double standards.

You two need a room, for some light petting, maybe a mutual hand job?

 

[martybegan]

So the only two choices were let her proceed or shoot her dead?

It wasn’t necessarily the only choice but it was probably a reasonable one.

A handful of officers were all that stood in between a violent mob and members of Congress whom they have a duty to protect.

This shouldn’t be controversial. If a horde of people were running through the White House and they were breaking into a door outside the Oval Office, no one would question secret service shooting someone.

It's amazing how far you will go to justify this woman dying because you hate her politics and you see her death as a political victory.

It's easy to justify. Imagine you're at home with your family. Your family is hiding behind you in a bedroom while you've got your gun trained on the door to that bedroom because a mob of people had broken into your house, could be heard chanting for the death of your family members, and were breaking in through your bedroom door which you barricaded as extra protection to keep them out. Suddenly, the door is broken down and the mob starts coming in. Tell me you wouldn't shoot the first person coming in....

In all likelihood, you would have already emptied your gun blindly through the door before they even break into your bedroom.

And if you killed any of them, you'd be facing no charges because it would be a justified shoot.

Two entirely different situations, and you ignore the fact that in your scenario other police officers would have been mixed in with the "mob"

Every time you try to justify this you have to get more and more retarded doing it.

Also, defense of one's home is a different circumstance than policing, and thus has different rules of use of deadly force.

Not entirely different in terms of it being a justified shoot.

100% different.

Nope, not entirely different. You just don't like hearing it in that perspective because you know what you would do. In both cases, a mob illegally breaks in. In both cases, said mobs threaten peoples' lives. In both cases, they break into where their potential victims are hiding. In both cases, people in the mob breaking in would be shot. In both cases, the shooter would not face charges because in both cases, it would be a justifiable shoot.

One is a home invasion, the other is trespassing in a public space, albeit a public space with limited access.

All this to gloat over the death of a woman, and use her death for your TDS gratification.

Sad.

 

[colfax_m]

No double standard, two different situations you idiots are trying to meld into the same situation because you can't argue on the merits of your position regarding the capitol shooting.

Right. Blake was alone and Babbitt was part of a violent mob. Something which you are desperate to avoid acknowledging.

 

[martybegan]

How many protesters were in that one hallway? How many officers were in that one hallway?

From the officers vantage point, it could have been dozens and dozens and dozens. He didn’t ask them for a head count. The officer knew hundreds of violent protestors were inside the Capitol. He knew that people were attacking officers.

So that means he was justified in shooting the one woman?

Really?

Try that at any other police interaction and see where that gets you.

He only had to shoot one person to keep the rest out. Had any others tried to gain access to the House chamber at that point, they too would have been shot.

And that isn't justification for a shooting by officers. "Pour encouragement les autres" is a soviet tactic, but not a viable police use of force explanation.

I didn't say that was justification. That was the result. The justification was protecting the lawmakers in the room behind him.

Which really doesn't justify deadly force against an unarmed woman trying to jump through a window.

So he should have just let her break in?

So the only two choices were let her proceed or shoot her dead?

They were already in, there were officers on her side of the barricade, and they didn't shoot anyone.

Your argument about other cops not shooting anyone is spurious. You don't know why they were there and you don't know if they knew there were still lawmakers in that chamber and you don't know if they didn't shoot anyone because the cops on the other side of that door were handling keeping the mob out of the chamber.

And the mob wasn't "already in there." They got as far a the entryway leading into the Speaker's Lobby which leads directly into the House chamber. It was the other side of that entryway which was barricaded with stacked furniture and armed police with guns drawn. Ashli Targetpractice ignored all that and got what she deserved. Poor thing. She once proudly served her nation but then dies a traitor.

it shows they didn't see a lethal threat to themselves.

All the rest is just you masturbating to the death of someone you hate politically, and is fucking sad.

You're an idiot, Marty. Politics have nothing to do with it. Sullivan was standing just a few feet away when that happened. Had he been the one shot while climbing through that broken out window, I'd still be calling it a justified shoot.

And it matter not if those cops didn't feel threatened. They weren't the ones blocking the doors leading into the House chamber. The cops who were, clearly felt an immediate lethal threat as they had their guns drawn.

Politics has everything to do with it for you, just like every other leftist.

Sorry, but your attempted justifications of this are just sad and pathetic, just like you.

I've already demonstrated you're an idiot about this. I need not do so again.

You haven't demonstrated anything but being a hack soi boi.

Of course I demonstrated it. If you're incapable of comprehending how I demonstrated it, that's on you.

I have no problem with that.

Again, all you have demonstrated is the ability to move the goal posts and "justify" shooting an unarmed woman because you hate her.

 

[martybegan]

No double standard, two different situations you idiots are trying to meld into the same situation because you can't argue on the merits of your position regarding the capitol shooting.

Right. Blake was alone and Babbitt was part of a violent mob. Something which you are desperate to avoid acknowledging.

They had also tried to use non lethal force to subdue Blake and it failed, repeatedly.

They tried a taser, they tried physically trying to subdue him. none of it worked.

 

[colfax_m]

They had also tried to use non lethal force to subdue Blake and it failed, repeatedly.

They tried a taser, they tried physically trying to subdue him. none of it worked.

Tugging at his shirt didn't do it, huh? Weird.

The police were outnumbered in that hallway and they were out of places to retreat from the violent mob.

 

[sealybobo]

Actually they have to justify it, that's the whole concept of a "justified use of deadly force"

You getting a hard on over a political enemies death doesn't cut it.

Fair enough, I didn't use the right language.

The use of force is justified by the rational threat to the life and safety of the police and their protectees.

She's not my political enemy. She's a tragedy that is the result of years of indoctrination.

One woman hopping through a window, an unarmed woman is not a threat to life and safety.

The cops on the other side of the door in direct contact with the other people sure didn't think so.

One woman no but she was part of a mob. And she was the first crazy who poked her head in.

Keep justifying it in your addled mind, you soi boi cuck.

How is kamala's dildo doing widening your ass?

This is something I would expect from the person losing the debate.

 

[martybegan]

They had also tried to use non lethal force to subdue Blake and it failed, repeatedly.

They tried a taser, they tried physically trying to subdue him. none of it worked.

Tugging at his shirt didn't do it, huh? Weird.

The police were outnumbered in that hallway and they were out of places to retreat from the violent mob.

Apples and oranges, only reason you are trying to compare is the usual lefty tactic of getting race added to the equation.

Same tired playbook.

You can't justify the shoot on it's own merits so you try to muddy the waters with THE CARD.

 

[martybegan]

Actually they have to justify it, that's the whole concept of a "justified use of deadly force"

You getting a hard on over a political enemies death doesn't cut it.

Fair enough, I didn't use the right language.

The use of force is justified by the rational threat to the life and safety of the police and their protectees.

She's not my political enemy. She's a tragedy that is the result of years of indoctrination.

One woman hopping through a window, an unarmed woman is not a threat to life and safety.

The cops on the other side of the door in direct contact with the other people sure didn't think so.

One woman no but she was part of a mob. And she was the first crazy who poked her head in.

Keep justifying it in your addled mind, you soi boi cuck.

How is kamala's dildo doing widening your ass?

This is something I would expect from the person losing the debate.

Nope, not losing at all, just trying to do 2 things. 1) keep myself entertained 2) let you useless mouth breathers know my opinion of you as people.

 

[colfax_m]

Apples and oranges, only reason you are trying to compare is the usual lefty tactic of getting race added to the equation.

Same tired playbook.

You can't justify the shoot on it's own merits so you try to muddy the waters with THE CARD.

I didn't say anything about race, boomer.

You're right it's apples and oranges. One situation is one guy who is outnumbered by police 2:1 and the other is a violent mob coming after a handful of police who are outnumber by more than 2:1. The police didn't seek conflict here. The mob came for them.

Are there other things they could have tried? Sure. Same could have been said for Blake. They could have tackled him instead of walking slowly behind him and tugging at his shirt. They could have tried restraining Babbitt, however that would have made them vulnerable to the rest of the violent mob she was with. The question that matters is did they have a reasonable fear for the safety of themselves and the people whom they were protecting. The answer is almost certainly yes.

 

[Faun]

He was known to have a knife, and he was going into his car where he could have had said knife.

Please show me where the woman was ever seen to be armed.

"Could have" is the standard for one person, "seen to be" is the standard for another.

Hmm, what could be the reason for such a double standard?

And they think they are winning this debate.

This is more fun now that the potus isn’t talking like them. Thank god we took our country back from the crazies who can’t see their hypocrisy and blatant double standards.

You two need a room, for some light petting, maybe a mutual hand job?

LOL

You're fantasizing about gay sex now, Marty??

Yet again, you reveal more about yourself than I'm certain you intended.

 

[Muhammed]

So the only two choices were let her proceed or shoot her dead?

It wasn’t necessarily the only choice but it was probably a reasonable one.

A handful of officers were all that stood in between a violent mob and members of Congress whom they have a duty to protect.

This shouldn’t be controversial. If a horde of people were running through the White House and they were breaking into a door outside the Oval Office, no one would question secret service shooting someone.

It's amazing how far you will go to justify this woman dying because you hate her politics and you see her death as a political victory.

Her death is a tragedy that could have been averted a million times before she decided to jump through a window.

I don’t have to justify it, but the facts are that it was almost certainly a rational action given the circumstances.

Actually they have to justify it, that's the whole concept of a "justified use of deadly force"

You getting a hard on over a political enemies death doesn't cut it.

And he did justify it which is why he's not been charged.

Who?