U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

[bodecea]

She probably walked in through the open front door.

No need to speculate. We know she tried to climb through a smashed window of a barricaded door. That's not being "let in". That's the exact opposite.

it's looting.

View attachment 485640

Looting, that’s legal

I see your problem....you think looting is legal.

 

[Mustang]

We will burn every city down unless they win!

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

This lawsuit isn't going anywhere except into the circular filing cabinet.

 

[Rigby5]

We will burn every city down unless they win!n unarmed

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

An unarmed rioter is still a riotor and can still pose a threat to an officer by sheer numbers

A single woman constitutes "sheer numbers"? I don't think so.

She wasn't a "single woman", she was part of an assaulting mob. When you're leading the assault, you're the first one to be hit when the shooting starts. Asli was trying to be the first one through the door.

That is speculative because it assumes that others would have followed, and we have no way of knowing.
But the term "assaulting" is inappropriate since the most that happened was petty vandalism. There was no deliberate violence against anyone by the demonstrators. There was some conflict with police, but only police who were hitting and pushing first. And again, the odds are a warning shot would have had the effect of ending any entry. So then murder was unwarranted. You can't just start shooting people because of what you think they might decide to do later.
Not when all the other options had not first been tried. For example, why not do like the Alabama police did in the 60s and use a fire hose, warning shots, dogs, arresting people, etc. Shooting an unarmed woman in the neck is just not a civilized option. It is an escalation beyond anything the demonstrators would ever have done.

 

[9thIDdoc]

We will burn every city down unless they win!n unarmed

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

An unarmed rioter is still a riotor and can still pose a threat to an officer by sheer numbers

A single woman constitutes "sheer numbers"? I don't think so.

She wasn't a "single woman", she was part of an assaulting mob. When you're leading the assault, you're the first one to be hit when the shooting starts. Asli was trying to be the first one through the door.

Here in America people are supposed to be held accountable for their actions. Part of an "assaulting mob"? Who exactly "assaulted" what and where is the evidence? Where is there evidence that she intended to harm anyone or that she colluded with anyone else to do so.? A government sponsored thug committed homicide and needs to be held accountable for his actions. That he has been shielded thus far certainly says nothing good about our current alleged government.

 

[bodecea]

We will burn every city down unless they win!n unarmed

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

An unarmed rioter is still a riotor and can still pose a threat to an officer by sheer numbers

A single woman constitutes "sheer numbers"? I don't think so.

She wasn't a "single woman", she was part of an assaulting mob. When you're leading the assault, you're the first one to be hit when the shooting starts. Asli was trying to be the first one through the door.

That is speculative because it assumes that others would have followed, and we have no way of knowing.
But the term "assaulting" is inappropriate since the most that happened was petty vandalism. There was no deliberate violence against anyone by the demonstrators. There was some conflict with police, but only police who were hitting and pushing first. And again, the odds are a warning shot would have had the effect of ending any entry. So then murder was unwarranted. You can't just start shooting people because of what you think they might decide to do later.
Not when all the other options had not first been tried. For example, why not do like the Alabama police did in the 60s and use a fire hose, warning shots, dogs, arresting people, etc. Shooting an unarmed woman in the neck is just not a civilized option. It is an escalation beyond anything the demonstrators would ever have done.

"it assumes that others would have followed" Oh the loop-dee-loops you orange cultists put yourselves thru.....

 

[Rigby5]

We will burn every city down unless they win!

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

This lawsuit isn't going anywhere except into the circular filing cabinet.

If you can shoot demonstrators for what others might later do, then you can shoot police for what they likely will later do and have done.
If the lawsuit does not win, then police will have to be all shot and killed.
Its self defense.

 

[jc456]

you all crack me up. No shit, the lack of honesty in your being is amazing. to make such a statement after all the looting and riots from the antifa BLM protests. Oh, no's no's, those looters weren't part of the protesters, then you make that statement. must really suck to be you!!!!

Looting is not protesting.

Ashlii Babbitt was DEFINITELY part of the protest which became a riot.

A riot for Trump.

what's the difference sylvester?

You don't know the difference between a protest and a riot? I see the problem here.

The clean up operation from the Washington "riot" involved fixing a broken window and picking up discarded cigarrette butts.

And all the poop and urine the trump cultists left in the Capitol.

Was in port a potties

Not inside the Capitol....your buddies pooped and pee'd all over the Capitol. Rioters left feces, urine in hallways and offices during mobbing of US Capitol

Don't you cultists know how to use a restroom?

Maybe the members of Congress actually shit on the floors like they shit on us and it was uncovered by the looters

 

[jc456]

Oh man - I SO wish them luck proving that shooting a Q-Kook climbing through a busted out window during a violent insurrection is worth 10 mil.
As Zog says: "As usual lawyers end up making money. Sad."
Put me in that camp.

And I'd have shot the traitor too!
She was directly outside House Chamber and had bragged about "Storming the Capitol"

Looting you mean, that’s not illegal, can’t shoot looters

 

[Rigby5]

We will burn every city down unless they win!n unarmed

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

An unarmed rioter is still a riotor and can still pose a threat to an officer by sheer numbers

A single woman constitutes "sheer numbers"? I don't think so.

She wasn't a "single woman", she was part of an assaulting mob. When you're leading the assault, you're the first one to be hit when the shooting starts. Asli was trying to be the first one through the door.

That is speculative because it assumes that others would have followed, and we have no way of knowing.
But the term "assaulting" is inappropriate since the most that happened was petty vandalism. There was no deliberate violence against anyone by the demonstrators. There was some conflict with police, but only police who were hitting and pushing first. And again, the odds are a warning shot would have had the effect of ending any entry. So then murder was unwarranted. You can't just start shooting people because of what you think they might decide to do later.
Not when all the other options had not first been tried. For example, why not do like the Alabama police did in the 60s and use a fire hose, warning shots, dogs, arresting people, etc. Shooting an unarmed woman in the neck is just not a civilized option. It is an escalation beyond anything the demonstrators would ever have done.

"it assumes that others would have followed" Oh the loop-dee-loops you orange cultists put yourselves thru.....

Wrong.
I am an anti-Trump, extreme leftist, socialist.
But I enjoyed seeing congress getting a taste of reality, after they lied about things like Iraqi WMD, Vietnam, civil rights, tax law corruption, mandatory private health insurance, the illegal War on Drugs, 3 strikes, asset forfeiture, etc.

 

[colfax_m]

If you can shoot demonstrators for what others might later do

Well yeah. Take a step back. Say a person points a gun at your head. You can shoot them because they’re about to shoot you. They haven’t, but they might do it.

 

[Rigby5]

Oh man - I SO wish them luck proving that shooting a Q-Kook climbing through a busted out window during a violent insurrection is worth 10 mil.
As Zog says: "As usual lawyers end up making money. Sad."
Put me in that camp.

And I'd have shot the traitor too!
She was directly outside House Chamber and had bragged about "Storming the Capitol"

Wrong.
She was going through a window to get to from the Senate lobby to the House lobby, so she was not directly outside the House Chamber. The shooter was inside the House Chamber, but he shot across the House Lobby.

 

[jc456]

She probably walked in through the open front door.

No need to speculate. We know she tried to climb through a smashed window of a barricaded door. That's not being "let in". That's the exact opposite.

it's looting.

View attachment 485640

Looting, that’s legal

I see your problem....you think looting is legal.

All mayors said so, not me

 

[Rigby5]

If you can shoot demonstrators for what others might later do

Well yeah. Take a step back. Say a person points a gun at your head. You can shoot them because they’re about to shoot you. They haven’t, but they might do it.

Pointing a gun at your head is not just a sign of deadly intent, but is illegal "conduct regardless of life".
That is because guns easily go off by accident.
Doesn't matter if they never intended to shoot even.
The act of reckless endangerment forfeits their right to life.

So intent and what they might do has nothing to do with it.

There is nothing remotely harmful by Ashli's conduct that required shooting.

 

[Mustang]

We will burn every city down unless they win!

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

This lawsuit isn't going anywhere except into the circular filing cabinet.

If you can shoot demonstrators for what others might later do, then you can shoot police for what they likely will later do and have done.
If the lawsuit does not win, then police will have to be all shot and killed.
Its self defense.

Kent State was a demonstration. What happened at the US Capitol on Jan 6 was NOT a demonstration. Thousands of people converged on the Capitol, and several hundred rioters broke into the Capitol and/or forced their way in, broke windows, severely beat police officers and verbally and physically threatened everyone who blocked their path as they were hunting for Speaker Pelosi and VP Pence who they chanted that they intended to hang. Given the fact that they had erected a gallows outside of the Capitol, it had to be considered a realistic threat because the mob was out of control.

 

[jc456]

We will burn every city down unless they win!

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

This lawsuit isn't going anywhere except into the circular filing cabinet.

If you can shoot demonstrators for what others might later do, then you can shoot police for what they likely will later do and have done.
If the lawsuit does not win, then police will have to be all shot and killed.
Its self defense.

Kent State was a demonstration. What happened at the US Capitol on Jan 6 was NOT a demonstration. Thousands of people converged on the Capitol, and several hundred rioters broke into the Capitol and/or forced their way in, broke windows, severely beat police officers and verbally and physically threatened everyone who blocked their path as they were hunting for Speaker Pelosi and VP Pence who they chanted that they intended to hang. Given the fact that they had erected a gallows outside of the Capitol, it had to be considered a realistic threat because the mob was out of control.

Looted

 

[Rigby5]

She probably walked in through the open front door.

No need to speculate. We know she tried to climb through a smashed window of a barricaded door. That's not being "let in". That's the exact opposite.

it's looting.

View attachment 485640

Looting, that’s legal

I see your problem....you think looting is legal.

All mayors said so, not me

Looting is legal when it is part of a justified protest.
The wealthy control the laws and police, so the only way to change the system when it is broken is by making it cost the wealthy.
(That is assuming all other means of change have been tried and failed.)

 

[Rigby5]

We will burn every city down unless they win!

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

This lawsuit isn't going anywhere except into the circular filing cabinet.

If you can shoot demonstrators for what others might later do, then you can shoot police for what they likely will later do and have done.
If the lawsuit does not win, then police will have to be all shot and killed.
Its self defense.

Kent State was a demonstration. What happened at the US Capitol on Jan 6 was NOT a demonstration. Thousands of people converged on the Capitol, and several hundred rioters broke into the Capitol and/or forced their way in, broke windows, severely beat police officers and verbally and physically threatened everyone who blocked their path as they were hunting for Speaker Pelosi and VP Pence who they chanted that they intended to hang. Given the fact that they had erected a gallows outside of the Capitol, it had to be considered a realistic threat because the mob was out of control.

Nonsense.
I agree Kent State was a better demonstration, and I disagree the election was stolen.
But I disagree the gallows was real, that any harm was intended, or that anyone was threatened.
The police lightly harmed had first caused much greater harm. I saw it.

 

[jc456]

She probably walked in through the open front door.

No need to speculate. We know she tried to climb through a smashed window of a barricaded door. That's not being "let in". That's the exact opposite.

it's looting.

View attachment 485640

Looting, that’s legal

I see your problem....you think looting is legal.

All mayors said so, not me

Looting is legal when it is part of a justified protest.
The wealthy control the laws and police, so the only way to change the system when it is broken is by making it cost the wealthy.
(That is assuming all other means of change have been tried and failed.)

I didn’t know there were unjustified protests

 

[Rigby5]

We will burn every city down unless they win!

At least we’ll learn the name of the murderer.

U.S. Capitol Police to Be Sued for $10 Million for Killing Unarmed Rioter

The family of Ashli Babbitt—the only person shot during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol—plans to sue the U.S. Capitol Police department, and the officer who shot her, for at least $10 million.

www.newsweek.com

This lawsuit isn't going anywhere except into the circular filing cabinet.

If you can shoot demonstrators for what others might later do, then you can shoot police for what they likely will later do and have done.
If the lawsuit does not win, then police will have to be all shot and killed.
Its self defense.

Kent State was a demonstration. What happened at the US Capitol on Jan 6 was NOT a demonstration. Thousands of people converged on the Capitol, and several hundred rioters broke into the Capitol and/or forced their way in, broke windows, severely beat police officers and verbally and physically threatened everyone who blocked their path as they were hunting for Speaker Pelosi and VP Pence who they chanted that they intended to hang. Given the fact that they had erected a gallows outside of the Capitol, it had to be considered a realistic threat because the mob was out of control.

Looted

Mustang is correct though that the Kent State demonstrators not only had real justification the DC protestors did not have, but the Kent State demonstrators did not loot. The DC protestors did loot.

 

[jc456]

Mustang is correct though that the Kent State demonstrators not only had real justification the DC protestors did not have, but the Kent State demonstrators did not loot. The DC protestors did loot

Explain the difference