Video of unarmed - Ashley Babbit - Trump Protester at the US Capitol - getting shot

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: neutronflux

that says what i've been saying, they left cause the couldn't stop them. notice these words,

These officers began evacuating the officers who had guarded the door down the stairs.

And from my cited source, the lawmakers were evacuated before Babbitt went through the window.


Is that false.

She was not a credible threat that required lethal force.

Probably the real reason why law enforcement standing at the door with Babbitt stood down.

a reply to: neutronflux

And from my cited source, the lawmakers were evacuated before Babbitt went through the window.

of course the coward law makers were gone, doesn't mean that the hundreds if not thousands of rioters were not a threat to all the cops or any other non law makers that might not have been out yet.

there are complaints from law makers about not enough law enforcement or security being present. or do you just want to ignore that.

in fact if you watch other videos it shows law makers still in the building hiding under their chairs, now how can they say for certain that they were all gone.

All summer ATS claimed that if BLM protesters banged on their car windows they would run them over. If they trespassed their property they would kill them. That all rioters should be shot.

Now we have people armed with pipes and any other weapon they could have breaking down the door inside a federal building to access the area where our Government is in the middle of an electoral process and she should have just been let in allowing the multitude behind her to do God knows what? Hang Pence as they were chanting? You can hear people say he's got a gun on video. She must of thought he would never fire at her. There was a lot of that attitude. One woman crying on video that " they are supposed to pepper spray BLM! Not us!" Smh

This place gives me hours of amusement.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

of course the coward law makers were gone, doesn't mean that the hundreds if not thousands of rioters were not a threat to all the cops or any other non law makers that might not have been out yet.

We are talking about a specific group standing toe toe with law enforcement.

there are complaints from law makers about not enough law enforcement or security present. or do you just want to ignore that.

Might make a great thread.

I though this thread was about an unarmed women being shot after lawmakers were evacuated. A ground that wrongly tried to breach doors, but never physically harmed the law enforcement that stood face to face with them. Unless you have some source I don’t have?

in fact if you watch other videos it shows law makers still in the build hiding under their chairs, now how can they say for certian that they were all gone.

Again. Referring to a specific group where it’s reported law makers were evacuated in the areas that specific group was trying to access.

I read that Pence did not leave the Capitol building. I also read the cop that took the shot was protecting someone in a safe room. Pence I would guess.

it's easy...don't violently storm government buildings, if you do, you might get shot...pretty easy concept.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

You’re debating somebody for whom the term “totality of circumstances” and actual facts don’t mean anything. That’s why claims are being made that it’s “reported” the group was trying to enter areas that had already been evacuated when the reality is the USCP chief said, specifically, that the group was forcing their way toward the house chamber, where members had yet to be evacuated from.

Good luck

a reply to: neutronflux

We are talking about a specific group standing toe toe with law enforcement.

the whole building is the capitol building, not just one spot.

do you not recall that five people were killed/ died due to the riot, one a police officer that that was beatin with a fire extinguisher and died later in the hospital. in total 50 cops were injured.

do you not think that the cops didn't know that? do you think that they should just stand there and wait to see if the mob swarms them and beats them maybe even kills them?

she and others were told repeatedly to leave and were being barred to the best to the police's abilities.
on top of that she should have known that she was taking a risk of bodily harm or death. it's on her head.

a reply to: Shamrock6

You’re debating somebody for whom the term “totality of circumstances” and actual facts don’t mean anything.

i know, just like pointing out how ignorant their posts are.

a reply to: timequake

If you wish to attempt to educate anyone little bit.

You might manage a paragraph or two.

That word salads kind of hard on the old skyballs.

At least that's my ""unqualified"", relevant as you like, opinion. x

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

That was my point.

A better video showing what the cops are doing is posted in my other link on the other thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The second video on that link has been removed and you will need to go to a Twitter account to see if.
mobile.twitter.com...

a reply to: neutronflux

I'm not sure what your training was, but in this case it is not beyond reason that this man was trained to stop anyone from entering a restricted place where a high security protectee was, and thus he had all the justification he needed as soon as Babbitt crossed the threshold.

a reply to: neutronflux

I already explained this. Just because a few uniformed LEO left down the stairs doesn't mean that there wasn't at least 2 other plain clothed security standing there, one with a gun drawn.

And yes, they probably didn't think any of these people would be so stupid as to climb through a barricaded window while a guy had a gun on them. But Babbitt proved them wrong. Up until that moment no one was shooting anyone but Babbitt is the one who forced the security threat and as soon as she did the uniformed LEO headed right back up.

originally posted by: Identified
a reply to: neutronflux

I'm not sure what your training was, but in this case it is not beyond reason that this man was trained to stop anyone from entering a restricted place where a high security protectee was, and thus he had all the justification he needed as soon as Babbitt crossed the threshold.

You have Evidence of that? And the the group was already in a restricted place standing with law enforcement that stood down.

a reply to: Identified

You

I already explained this. Just because a few uniformed LEO left down the stairs doesn't mean that there wasn't at least 2 other plain clothed security standing there, one with a gun drawn.

You cannot just point a gun at someone. So the officer was already in violation by pointing a firearm at Babbitt by her simply being on the other side of the door.

A fire arm is either drawn because there is actual credible threat to someone’s life. Or to make an arrest.

A fire is not drawn because someone is simply present.

Again. If Babbitt was such a threat that a gun was pointed at her, then the other law enforcement present with her toe to toe would have responded as back. Not stood down to stand aside.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Identified
a reply to: neutronflux

I'm not sure what your training was, but in this case it is not beyond reason that this man was trained to stop anyone from entering a restricted place where a high security protectee was, and thus he had all the justification he needed as soon as Babbitt crossed the threshold.

You have Evidence of that? And the the group was already in a restricted place standing with law enforcement that stood down.

You’ve been asked repeatedly to provide actual evidence that the shooting was out of policy and haven’t done so. You don’t get to keep demanding others provide evidence while you refuse to do so without having the behavior pointed out.

So the officer was already in violation by pointing a firearm at Babbitt by her simply being on the other side of the door.

Please cite the policy to support this. Thanks in advance

a reply to: neutronflux

Evidence of security being able to kill someone who is threatening a high target protectee?
You do realize there are 9 members of Congress who have full time Capitol Police security, right?
How many of these members of Congress do you think were on Capitol Hill on Wednesday?
All of them maybe?

Which one do you think their security detail would just let some crazy lady come on in and get close to them?



Law enforcement did not stand down. There is literally a LEO with a gun drawn on them and her during all of this.

It also doesn't matter if Babbitt was in the toilet with Pelosi before this happened. The point is Babbitt crossed a threshold that Capitol Police guarding Members of Congress decided was one step too close. She was warned by the guy with a gun on the other side of a barricaded door.

a reply to: Shamrock6

And you have repeatedly asked to post the same policy when lethal force is authorized.

From my experience in the military. And the procedures I was dictated to follow. Shooting an armed person with no credible means to threaten anyone’s life would land you in military prison. Even if they were trespassing on a military post.

The polices were written as threats to anyone’s life.

If the officer was there to protect a specific person as a body guard. Why was that officer not with that person.

The law makers concerning Babbitt’s group was evacuated before Babbitt made the attempt to go through the window. Is that false.

a reply to: Identified

You

Which one do you think their security detail would just let some crazy lady come on in and get close to them?

One. It’s not a matter of crazy. It’s a matter of being a credible threat with the intent to cause physical harm.

Two. There are ways to stop an unarmed “crazy lady” without shooting her. Especially when there literally was a group of law enforcement officers standing toe to toe with her that was told to stand down.

originally posted by: slatesteam

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
The woman was a traitor and got what she deserved. Period.

Um. Agree to disagree. But thanks for proving my point about the Left cheering on death to their political opponentz,

Dare I say existential adversaries......

“Land of the Free, Home of the Brave,” eh?

I don't think it's right this woman lost her life.

Would you have anything to say to Trump supporters who, the morning after her death, came to ATS posting that they hoped that she was Antifa or that said she was an Antifa agitator?

Disgusting!