Ashli Babbitt - Capitol Shooting Victim

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neutronflux
You just get $issed because I use and cite facts with logic.

Actually, you got caught implying the Capitol Police reported to the DoJ.

Please quote where I made such a post.

Can’t can you.

By the way...

The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, created in 1957 by the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, works to uphold the civil and constitutional rights of all Americans, particularly some of the most vulnerable members of our society. The Division enforces federal statutes prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity), disability, religion, familial status, national origin, and citizenship status.

www.justice.gov...

What I actually posted was...

“ I was in the military, and going off the rules dictated by the department of justice.


Do you have any proof the authorization of lethal force is that much more different for Capitol police.”



“Have anything to contradict the Department of Justice would have different authorization for lethal force for capital police VS my real life experience being an armed guard in the military.”


I never posted in terms of who reported to who. Is that false. I posted in terms of DOJ, and what is considered authorization of lethal force which is ultimately a civil rights issue.

originally posted by: neutronflux
Please quote where I made such a post.

Every post where you mentioned that Capitol Police and the DoJ.

You're ignoring the basis of POTENTIAL THREAT which is stated in every single one of those ROEs.

And if you watch the video she was up there, with the guys that were banging on the glass, breaking the windows, before going back for another 20 seconds and then back up front when the window was broken. I don't know what she did beforehand. I know that she was part of a violent mob verbally expressing intent to cause harm. Or have you not heard the whole video where the group she is walking with is talking about killing cops and "# the blue" to their faces?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neutronflux
Please quote where I made such a post.

Every post where you mentioned that Capitol Police and the DoJ.

Really. Who would oversee court cases and lawsuits involving the Capitol police violating civil rights?

originally posted by: neutronflux
Really.

Really.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: neutronflux
Please quote where I made such a post.

Every post where you mentioned that Capitol Police and the DoJ.

Really. Who would oversee court cases and lawsuits involving the Capitol police violating civil rights?

It could be the DOJ but could also be the agency themselves, local courts, or the FBI. It depends on who the person at the other end of that violation goes to.

a reply to: Skooter_NB

You

You're ignoring the basis of POTENTIAL THREAT which is stated in every single one of those ROEs.

How am I?

Are you referring to from homeland security

www.dhs.gov...

2. A DHS LEO may use deadly force only when the LEO has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the LEO or to another person.7

Notice the wording reasonable belief statement...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Skooter_NB

You

I can cite, and have cited, how she was a threat.

How, being unarmed against armed law enforcement.

No search, a backpack.

It’s not against the law to have a backpack.

She never reached for her back pack.

The law enforcement that stood face to face with her were not concerned with her back pack, and stood down.

Did she make any credible threat against anyone’s body or life. No.



Her hands were clearly visible.

amongst a mob which had already shown violence and destruction.

Again. Babbitt was face to face with law enforcement. Did she ever threaten them, or physically attack any person with the intent to cause bodily harm. No. The fact the unarmed law enforcement that stood down and walked away from Babbitt bares testament to that fact.

In the ROE listed above, three different agencies, all say that the officer needs to make a split second decision in assessing the threat.

There was no split second decision. The office was armed. They were separated by space. She made no sign of threatening persons bodily. Nobody was within the area of her reach. She was busy climbing through the window. Her hands were clearly visible. She never reached for her backpack. She was not an immediate threat to anyone by any reasonable standard, and there is no reasonable argument the officer that shot her had to make a split second discussion when Babbitt is clearly seen having no weapons in her hands with nobody in arms reach to attack.


So. Who did Babbitt physical attack to warrant lethal force against her?

I already addressed much of your “question” on Jan 7.

Might try reading through the whole thread....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: spacedoubt

You..

She went through a broken window wearing a backpack,

So? Nothing in her hands to make her a threat as she climbed through the window?

Climbing through a window?

Place the handcuffs on her as she climb through?

Or push her out?

How does shooting her stop what ever nefarious item was in her backpack that was not in her hand?

with a group that was in some sort of mob mentality.

Then why was only one person shot?

They were heading to stop the peaceful transfer of power.

With a backpack? How exactly if the building was evacuated of lawmakers?

She got shot,

You said she was in a group? Why only her? And how does a group simultaneously climb through a broken window?

Why not detain her as she climb through the window?

because she did something really stupid

Stupid people should be shot. I think we all would have gunshot wounds.

and illegal.

People get arrested with backpacks everyday without being shot, nor shot and killed?

Yes, reasonable belief. Like all the things I've stated, in breaking into a federal building with force.

And yes, I have addressed that she didn't have anything in her hands. Neither did the people who killed the woman, and the person who didn't bring a fire extinguisher into the building but still ended up killing a cop.

As I said, we'll have to leave it up to the people actually making this decision. But without hindsight, how about this last question, how is she not a potential threat?

(also in those posts above, you are quoting things that I didn't write...)

originally posted by: neutronflux
People get arrested with backpacks everyday without being shot, nor shot and killed?

Good point. Well put. Very observant of you.

However they usually aren't in the middle of a braying mob that's stormed the second most prominent building in the US seat of government, screaming about hanging politicians.

Or do you think suicide bombers are only exclusively muslim, dressed in burkahs and it 'could never happen here' - bearing in mind the police had received bomb threats as well?

I think you need to check your levels of stupid a little.

Yet how many hypocrites here attacked Kyle Rittenhouse for something on video that was clearly self defense vs. the execution of this patriot veteran.

a reply to: Littlebatman

You

Or do you think suicide bombers are only exclusively muslim, dressed in burkahs and it 'could never happen here' - bearing in mind the police had received bomb threats as well?

And a bomb can be easily rigged to detonate to explode if say an individual becomes incapacitated from being shot. In this case, would have injured the law enforcement with Babbitt. And the law enforcement team coming up from behind Babbitt. And the person, or persons acting more like a videographer than mob.

But, Again. Babbitt was not armed.

The law enforcement literary standing face to face with Babbitt didn’t think she was a threat, and stood down. Didn’t think much of her backpack.

She gave no indication she had anything threatening in her backpack.

She did not reach for her backpack when shot.

Her hands were visible free of weapons when shot.

a reply to: Littlebatman

Or how about. A clear warning from the officer to stop, and remove the backpack before going right to kill shot.

a reply to: Littlebatman

And using your logic. Anyone with a jacket could be a bomber. Bombs are not exclusive to backpacks.

a reply to: Littlebatman

Or shoes for that matter....

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Littlebatman

Or how about. A clear warning from the officer to stop, and remove the backpack before going right to kill shot.

Please put yourself in the real world.

You've seen the pictures and video of the storming of the building. When crap like that happens then youy don't play nice. It's not hollywood. He's not paid to look at a mob and shout "stick em up" - he's paid to protect the people in the building and his own life.

And, before anyone else jumps in, it is also not the same as kneeling on the neck of an unarmed man in restraints either.

originally posted by: Skooter_NB
Yes, reasonable belief. Like all the things I've stated, in breaking into a federal building with force.

And yes, I have addressed that she didn't have anything in her hands. Neither did the people who killed the woman, and the person who didn't bring a fire extinguisher into the building but still ended up killing a cop.

As I said, we'll have to leave it up to the people actually making this decision. But without hindsight, how about this last question, how is she not a potential threat?

(also in those posts above, you are quoting things that I didn't write...)

Just posting this again. neutronflux states that she was not armed, which is true, but that is hindsight. Jensen who was leading the group on the other side of the building did have a weapon concealed the entire time, but how were the guards there supposed to know that? You can't say because you now know that she didn't have a weapon that she wasn't a threat.

Again, POTENTIAL.

And what if she did get through, and not comply, and somehow forced the weapon from the armed cop's hands? She was a long serving vet with training.

originally posted by: Skooter_NB
Just posting this again.

And I'll post this again...

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
There's a 100% foolproof method for not getting shot to death after violently breaking and entering. If you're interested I can explain the steps.

originally posted by: Littlebatman

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Littlebatman

Or how about. A clear warning from the officer to stop, and remove the backpack before going right to kill shot.

Please put yourself in the real world.

You've seen the pictures and video of the storming of the building. When crap like that happens then youy don't play nice. It's not hollywood. He's not paid to look at a mob and shout "stick em up" - he's paid to protect the people in the building and his own life.

And, before anyone else jumps in, it is also not the same as kneeling on the neck of an unarmed man in restraints either.

I honestly don't think he has watched all the videos. It is clear the violence and threats (physical and verbal) that proceeded the shooting.

a reply to: Littlebatman

You

You've seen the pictures and video of the storming of the building.

Federal court houses had to be protected from being stormed, and police precincts were stored all summer. Police precincts were abandoned. Lethal force was never used.

You

When crap like that happens then youy don't play nice.

Then lethal force should have been used all summer, and from the get go when the Capitol was stormed.

Babbitt was supposedly in a “Mob”. Why was she the only one shot. Especially when there were supposedly actual cases of physical assault that day, and there is no evidence Babbitt physical assaulted anyone

He's not paid to look at a mob and shout "stick em up" -

He’s paid and bound by the law to fallow the rules of de-escalation and justification of lethal force of homeland security if he was capital police.

he's paid to protect the people in the building and his own life.

He shot an unarmed women who’s hands were clearly visible and they were separated by space. With nobody within arms reach of Babbitt in an area where lawmakers were cleared.

a reply to: Skooter_NB

What. The video of Babbitt and a small group of people banging and trying to break the glass of the doors while law enforcement was standing in front of them. Babbitt facing the door. Law enforcement to the left of Babbitt. The area was cleared of lawmakers. Law enforcement face to face with Babbitt’s small group stood down. A group of armed law enforcement was coming up behind or beside Babbitt from a stairwell. Babbitt having no weapon. Hands clearly visible. Separated from her shooter by distance. With Babbitt making no threats of physical violence against anyone. With no one within arms reach that Babbitt could harm, she was shot in the neck. The shooter was in front and to the left of Babbitt. The shooter took the risk of shooting the law enforcement standing to Babbitt’s left, and the law enforcement team coming from the stairwell, and the person acting as a videographer without need.