XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump
From: MeanDog@Snarl.Dash
On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 19:00:35 -0800, Alan wrote:
>On 2026-01-16 18:51, Skeeter wrote:
>> In article <10kelfi$24cdg$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-
>> uh@nope.com says...
>>>
>>> On 2026-01-16 16:17, Socialism is for losers wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 15:54:03 -0800, Alan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2026-01-16 06:58, Socialism is for losers wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 22:12:18 -0800, Alan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2026-01-15 21:56, Socialism is for losers wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 03:14:15 +0000, Mitchell Holman
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Skeeter wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:MPG.43d32e5ab2984fa998ab8b@usnews.blocknews.net:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In article <10kbt0p$15km6$12@dont-email.me>, nuh-
>>>>>>>>>> uh@nope.com says...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-01-14 22:07, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article ,
>>>>>>>>>>>> noemail@aol.com says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Skeeter wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:MPG.43d1df313a3f71e98ab02@usnews.blocknews.net:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <10k96l8$8549$14@dont-email.me>, nuh-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uh@nope.com says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-01-12 09:39, AlleyCat wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 11 Jan 2026 23:16:44 -0800, Alan says...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Both criminals.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You aren't allowed to shoot at someone when they aren't a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> threat.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Correct... I guess.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, no. (see bottom)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even if his first shot was when he was near the front of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vehicle, his next two were from directly beside the driver's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> door, and it was turning AWAY from him.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And I've explained this, moron.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Law enforcement, after having been run over, plowed down,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assaulted with a deadly weapon, vehicularly (Y, IK) assaulted,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or any other term you might want to use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here, usually shoot until the perpetrator is incapacitated or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out of range, to keep the driver from doing any more harm to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others or even themselves.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Except this officer was not "run over" OR "plowed down".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But he was hit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A threat is not "over" just because the vehicle has cleared
the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> officer's path.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, actually it is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who says? You? LOL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If Good has already demonstrated her intent (which the
officers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> did not KNOW) to use a vehicle as a weapon, they remain a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'deadly threat" until they are stopped. Turning "away" could
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simply be a maneuver to reposition for another strike or to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flee at high speeds, endangering the public.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Her obvious intent was to leave the area and an officer with no
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authority grabbed at her door, escalating the situation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No authority? He's a law officer you moron.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So were the Capitol Police that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump (and you) want to prosecute.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Like the one that murdered Ashley?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> She was breaking into a secure area and posed an immediate threat
to
>>>>>>>>>>> those the police were defending behind that door.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They had guns and she didn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just like Renee Good.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> who weaponize her car.
>>>>>>> Who was just trying to leave the area.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By stomping on the gas with a man standing in front of her car?
>>>>> By turning her wheel all the way to her right and assuming that a man
>>>>> who had been walking to her left would continue to walk left.
>>>>>
>>>>> And there was no "stomping".
>>>>
>>>> The car sure jerked ahead as it hit him.
>>> Nope. The "officer" might have jerked, but there is video taken from
>>> outside the car and it moved off in a completely ordinary manner.
>>
>> It jerked.
>
>The officer seems to have jerked in his cellphone video...
>
>...but that doesn't prove that he was struck.
The other videos show he was hit.
>Moving himself quickly out of the way could produce such a jerk.
>
>>>
>>> And you haven't addressed that she was clearly steering away from him..
>>
>> Well she's a shitty driver then. Besides she was making a
>> u turn on a one way street. You defended her by saying she
>> didn't know it was a one way street. So not only is she a
>> shitty driver she shouldn't even be driving at all.
>
>None of that changes that she was steering away from him.
She still hit him
>>> ...which she wouldn't have been doing if she was "weaponizing her car".
>>
>>
>> Oh you read her mind? How many time have you personally
>> been in the same situation? Never? Then STFU.
>If her intent was to hit him, she chose a course of action that
>absolutely minimized the chance.
--
Only losers want Socialism or Communism.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
