Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nope, it actually was legal. Two independent departments investigated and determined it was justifiable. As a result, the Justice Department decided not to pursue criminal charges.
Here's the kicker -- THEY decide when a law is broken, you don't. From you, it's just frustrated, whiney bitching.
I’m looking at the regulations for use of deadly force and it doesn’t say anything about not being able to shoot a woman.
The officer felt a rational fear for his safety and acted accordingly. Babbitt made her threat by crawling through the violently broken window of a barricaded door.
She was seconds away from being able to attack them but you say that’s not imminent.
No facts matter to you. You made up your mind and will twist, lie and ignore anything to the contrary.
He was afraid of the mob. Any rational person would be especially given the fact that mob seriously harmed scores of officers that day.If he felt fear from her, he doesn't deserve his badge and is a whiny little bitch.
"rational"
No, it wasn't imminent.
Says the fucktard jerking off over this because it happened to one of his political opponents.
He was afraid of the mob. Any rational person would be especially given the fact that mob seriously harmed scores of officers that day.
How many seconds away constitutes imminent in your diseased partisan mind?
unarmed. with more than a few person lengths between her and the shooter.
I did not admit to being made an example. You are again lying and twisting language because you’re a partisan hack.And he shot one woman, to deter the others. Again, that isn't allowed in use of lethal force rules.
You keep admitting to it being as an example, then claiming it wasn't as an example.
And yet no one else was shot. Just her. Unarmed and hanging through a window.
And he shot one woman, to deter the others. Again, that isn't allowed in use of lethal force rules.
You keep admitting to it being as an example, then claiming it wasn't as an example.
And yet no one else was shot. Just her. Unarmed and hanging through a window.
No other cop shot the entire day.
Unarmed. Lets make sure we tell riot cops that going forward everywhere.
Judge, jury, and executioner.
Their power flows from the people. When the people decide things are truly fucked, bad things happen.
You believe government owns the people, not the other way around. That makes you no better than any lickspittle dictator through history.
All to "Get Trump"
How short sighted and ignorant.
That's like saying that Heather Heyes died for our right to not have Jews replace us.Whether she "died for freedom" is debatable but the fact is that she was murdered and the prevailing opinion on the left seems to be that an unarmed (white) woman who posed no threat somehow deserved it.
Nobody else got that close to breaking into the chamber while lawmakers were still inside.
Didn't mean anything for Michael Brown either.
She was not shot to get Trump. She was shot for making herself an imminent threat to the safety of others.
Repeating the same conclusion over and over doesn’t make it true.She was shot by a panicked police officer who violated deadly use of force rules.
Repeating the same conclusion over and over doesn’t make it true.
Especially when you have to twist language and facts to do so.
You have labeled the investigation a “sham” despite previously admitting you’ve never seen it and have no idea what it entailed.Hiding behind a sham investigation and pretending you don't get a chubby thinking someone you hate politically died doesn't make your shit true.
What twisting?
You have labeled the investigation a “sham” despite previously admitting you’ve never seen it and have no idea what it entailed.
That would be called “prejudging”.
They are doing their best to ensure that they never lose another election.I don't know. Have they tried to overthrow the government of the United States?..no?...well, you have your answer then.
Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request and they released it.When did they actually release the entire investigation, and not a summary?
Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request and they released it.
"Sergeant [redacted] observed a white, female protester was climbing through an opened area where the glass pane had been knocked out. He heard a gunshot and this female fell backwards through the opening. The crowd on the other side of the barricaded east doors, began to step back and some put their hands in the air. Sergeant [redacted] observed Lieutenant Byrd step back just after hearing the gunshot. He did not see anything in the female protester’s hands prior to the gunshot," the Internal Affairs Division report stated.
"Sergeant [redacted] never went on the other side of the barricaded east door. He also did not know that it was Lieutenant Byrd who shot his gun until he talked to him moments after it occurred. Lieutenant Byrd looked upset and stated, ‘I was the one who took the shot,’" the report continued.
