Justice Department ordered to answer for Jan. 6 killing of Ashli Babbitt

[rightwinger]

Still, those many many instance are not a justification for any other instance. There is right, and there is wrong, in this case, I think Byrd had other options. Remember, he wasn’t the only officer there.

The police were outnumbered by an angry mob
They had reached their last line of defense

Non lethal options were not working

 

[ThisIsMe]

Do Capitol Police carry tear gas ?
Do they have gas masks?

A taser is useless against a mob

I’m sure they have access to tear gas and masks. You think the security plan of the congressional buildings are only included “stop or I’ll shoot”?

Again, they have an entire underground system with safe rooms. I’m sure their security force has access to more than just guns. Even if they didn’t, they could have gotten them there the moment they saw what was happening.

A taser doesn’t need to be useful to a mob, a taser just needed to be useful to babbit

 

[rightwinger]

So you’re saying the life of a congressman is more valuable than anyone else’s?

Their life is worth more than an angry mob trying to kill them
Capitol Police’s job is to protect Congress
Ashli had options, she chose not to take them

 

[pknopp]

I think some were and some weren’t justified and I defended those when they weren’t justified.

I defended Floyd and I defended Massey, and when I see instances when the police are clearly in the wrong, I’ll point that out. I seem to be the only one here who will cross lines like that

You have (I did a quick search and saw that). I'm explaining the reasoning of some others.

They saw people needlessly get killed by law enforcement and have a large number defend law enforcement. Now they are expected by those same people to be upset here.

I said early on I saw no justification for shooting her but the replies are simply giving what was gave.

I don't really support that either but there it is.

Still, those many many instance are not a justification for any other instance. There is right, and there is wrong, in this case, I think Byrd had other options. Remember, he wasn’t the only officer there.

The thing is, while I agree no one is ever going to get convicted for shooting someone for breaking into the Capital.

 

[rightwinger]

I’m sure they have access to tear gas and masks. You think the security plan of the congressional buildings are only included “stop or I’ll shoot”?

Again, they have an entire underground system with safe rooms. I’m sure their security force has access to more than just guns. Even if they didn’t, they could have gotten them there the moment they saw what was happening.

A taser doesn’t need to be useful to a mob, a taser just needed to be useful to babbit

The police repeatedly avoided force as they fell back in their defensive perimeter
Use of tear gas indoors is not an option when nobody has gas masks
Members of Congress were still in the Chamber at that point

 

[ThisIsMe]

No there weren't "other options". What you think a plain clothed Police Lieutenant carries around a full kit of non-lethal alternatives with them? He had his service firearm and maybe a couple of spare magazines. That was it.

You post giving the impression that you choose to ignore the context of the situation as it existed and substitute a fantasy world not connected to the contextual reality of the moment in time.

I doubt of Lt. Byrd could have raise a finger and said to the violent riotous mob: "Hey could you all hold on for a little bit. I need to run down to the Armory and pick up a taser and some spare charge packs, tear gas grenades, and maybe a riot shotgun so I can load bean bag rounds. While I'm gone ya'll stay right here and not kill members of Congress. Can I pick up Starbucks for anyone on my way back?"

WW

What you think a plain clothed Police Lieutenant carries around a full kit of non-lethal alternatives with them? He had his service firearm and maybe a couple of spare magazines. That was it.

Nope, he probably doesn’t carry them with him, but in that building is likely a security office, with access to such methods.

You post giving the impression that you choose to ignore the context of the situation as it existed and substitute a fantasy world not connected to the contextual reality of the moment in time.

No, I fully recognize the situation. Watch the video, it was intense. Long before babbit ever even had a chance to get into that window, counter measures should have been at the ready. If that corridor was so important, test gas and masks should have been ready to go.

I doubt of Lt. Byrd could have raise a finger and said to the violent riotous mob: "Hey could you all hold on for a little bit. I need to run down to the Armory and pick up a taser and some spare charge packs, tear gas grenades, and maybe a riot shotgun so I can load bean bag rounds. While I'm gone ya'll stay right here and not kill members of Congress. Can I pick up Starbucks for anyone on my way back?"

lol, come on now, Byrd wasn’t the only one there. Besides, again, when they saw the riot starting to happen, all that stuff should have been in consideration. That’s the first thing they should have done was to gather what methods they had.

Also, people are forgetting, if pelosi (who admitted fault) would have called for the NG that day, when there was chatter about possible very large crowds….none of this would have even happened.

Capitol police and coordination with the DC metro could have gotten them all the counter measures they needed.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The police were outnumbered by an angry mob
They had reached their last line of defense

Non lethal options were not working

They hadn’t tried non lethal options. Again, tear gas through the window would have dispersed that crowd.

 

[pknopp]

They hadn’t tried non lethal options. Again, tear gas through the window would have dispersed that crowd.

Also in previous case after case the argument in defense of the cops was "Just do as they say and you don't get hurt".

Somehow it didn't apply here.

This was said even in cases where someone was hurt or killed even though they were doing as instructed.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The police repeatedly avoided force as they fell back in their defensive perimeter
Use of tear gas indoors is not an option when nobody has gas masks
Members of Congress were still in the Chamber at that point

I’m sure gas masks were available. The security of those buildings doesn’t rely on just people with handguns.

Members of Congress were still in the Chamber at that point

If that’s the case then their security failed them. Part of protection is to move people to a safe place.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Also in previous case after case the argument in defense of the cops was "Just do as they say and you don't get hurt".

Somehow it didn't apply here.

This was said even in cases where someone was hurt or killed even though they were doing as instructed.

I get that, but do those instances justify this one?

 

[pknopp]

I get that, but do those instances justify this one?

No, but many of the replies are simply examples of you get what you give.

Many who condemn Babbitt getting shot will also still defend the cops when there is a minority involved no matter the facts.

 

[WorldWatcher]

No, but many of the replies are simply examples of you get what you give.

Many who condemn Babbitt getting shot will also still defend the cops when there is a minority involved no matter the facts.

"Minority" is a distraction in Ms. Babbitt's situation. Not even relevant.

The question was "Did Ashli Babbitt's attempt to lead a violent mob through the last law enforcement barrier with then immediate access to the House Chamber occupied by members of Congress, their Staff, and civilians present a clear and present danger of death or serious bodily injury to law enforcement or those in the chamber by herself or members of the violent mob."

Any reasonable person looks at the context of the day and the video to evaluate the use of lethal force and arrives at a sane conclusion of - "Yes".

Context matters. And race is part of the rubic that day.

WW