So Babbit Was Murdered After All...

[5-Points 3,431]

1 hour ago, WhiteWonder said:

I mean, I believe there are still some states that don't have full castle doctrine and still incorporate a duty to retreat first, if possible. 

but also, whose house was this?

Yes, California is one of them. 

Also, it was "The Peoples House" so Ashli had every right to be there. 

[thegeneral 3,055]

Just now, WhiteWonder said:

Now you sound like you are getting triggered, when I specifically said that I do not follow this closely or let it consume me and that I had legitimate questions. I had no idea she committed any violent acts or that most of the rioters committed any violent acts. I don't believe breaking and entering / property damage is considered a violent crime. 

A majority of your linked press release is just a breakdown of what occurred on that day. I don't disagree with any of it (like I said, never should have happened) and I would say the way it is laid out would indeed make me wonder why a gun was fired. 

the closing statement of the release simply says "no evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer willfully committed a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242".... it does not explain how or why they came to that conclusion. Which I wouldn't expect a press release to do. So I really can't say if I agree with their findings or reasoning 

Triggered. Oh ok.

The report I linked quickly summarizes what occurred and why the officer wasn’t charged. Specifically “Prosecutors would have to prove not only that the officer used force that was constitutionally unreasonable, but that the officer did so “willfully,” which the Supreme Court has interpreted to mean that the officer acted with a bad purpose to disregard the law”

You not knowing what happened is a you problem here, in the amount of time you have responded you could have read up a bit and watched multiple camera angles of the shooting.

Watch the videos, it played out as I described. After that if you think that the officer committed murder or should be charged, well I think that is nuts.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,111]

It’s funny. Shitlib Tim Hack wants to dismiss everything about one cop because he was doing deeds with a prostitute, but he has no qualms accepting everything Byrd says, despite his many, many, issues as a police officer. 

[WhiteWonder 2,699]

1 hour ago, thegeneral said:

Triggered. Oh ok.

The report I linked quickly summarizes what occurred and why the officer wasn’t charged. Specifically “Prosecutors would have to prove not only that the officer used force that was constitutionally unreasonable, but that the officer did so “willfully,” which the Supreme Court has interpreted to mean that the officer acted with a bad purpose to disregard the law”

You not knowing what happened is a you problem here, in the amount of time you have responded you could have read up a bit and watched multiple camera angles of the shooting.

Watch the videos, it played out as I described. After that if you think that the officer committed murder or should be charged, well I think that is nuts.

Both you and Tim are assuming I have not seen any video. Just because I don't let Jan 6 consume and have some questions about it doesn't mean i've never seen video or read anything.

I am glad you are able to see that your link is a quick summary of what and why but not HOW they came to their conclusion, like I stated.  Again, I am not saying I would agree or disagree, I am saying a press release is usually not enough for you to link and say "what do you disagree with", as they are not often very specific. 

Yes, I say triggered because it sounds like you are getting agitated with the fact that I have questions or the fact that my personal feeling is that no one needed to be shot. Kind of telling that no one else was shot on Jan 6th, no? 

[5-Points 3,431]

8 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

It’s funny. Shitlib Tim Hack wants to dismiss everything about one cop because he was doing deeds with a prostitute, but he has no qualms accepting everything Byrd says, despite his many, many, issues as a police officer. 

If Derrick Chauvin had left his service weapon in a public bathroom, he and the rest of the apologists here, would have been screaming to the sky that he shouldn't have even been on the job that day. 

They're a joke. 

[WhiteWonder 2,699]

I also see a lot of people posting in this topic who I would bet had no issues with things like the BLM protests which, while largely peaceful, had their fair share of destructive incidents that involved breaking into businesses, property destruction, looting, arson, etc. 

Would it have been okay to shoot and kill any of those rioters? (I say no and I bet they do too) A business is someone's place of livelihood... if they were inside and rioters broke in... okay to kill?  I was just given a comparison to my place of work being broken into, so 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,111]

Byrd failed a background check to buy a weapon. 

[TimHauck 2,654]

41 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

A business is someone's place of livelihood... if they were inside and rioters broke in... okay to kill? 

Yes.  Especially if the business owner gave several verbal warnings with the gun visible.

[thegeneral 3,055]

1 hour ago, WhiteWonder said:

Both you and Tim are assuming I have not seen any video. Just because I don't let Jan 6 consume and have some questions about it doesn't mean i've never seen video or read anything.

I am glad you are able to see that your link is a quick summary of what and why but not HOW they came to their conclusion, like I stated.  Again, I am not saying I would agree or disagree, I am saying a press release is usually not enough for you to link and say "what do you disagree with", as they are not often very specific. 

Yes, I say triggered because it sounds like you are getting agitated with the fact that I have questions or the fact that my personal feeling is that no one needed to be shot. Kind of telling that no one else was shot on Jan 6th, no? 

 

I sent you a brief recap because you haven’t been bothered up to this point to spend time getting your questions answered. The press release concisely explained the situation and why the guy wasn’t charged. Did it not explain why he was not charged to you?

I’m not agitated or triggered . You can think whatever you like. This lady was deluded and it cost her life.  You have said you did not follow this closely. 

It is wild no one else was shot. Guns were drawn in the other barricaded entrances to the room this cop was protecting but those people weren’t crazy enough to enter. 

[thegeneral 3,055]

1 hour ago, WhiteWonder said:

I also see a lot of people posting in this topic who I would bet had no issues with things like the BLM protests which, while largely peaceful, had their fair share of destructive incidents that involved breaking into businesses, property destruction, looting, arson, etc. 

Would it have been okay to shoot and kill any of those rioters? (I say no and I bet they do too) A business is someone's place of livelihood... if they were inside and rioters broke in... okay to kill?  I was just given a comparison to my place of work being broken into, so 

Yes I would have no issue if a rioter were to be shot If they break into a business, then break down doors that are barricaded inside the building where a person with a gun yelling “stop” happens to be.

[TimHauck 2,654]

2 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Yes I would have no issue if a rioter were to be shot If they break into a business, then break down doors that are barricaded inside the building where a person with a gun yelling “stop” happens to be.

Yup.  And neither would anyone here if the breaker-inner was black.

[WhiteWonder 2,699]

Support the cop, defund the police… lack of consistency is funny on both sides 

however I’m still not seeing where gun fire was warranted.