XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: nuh-uh@nope.com   
      
   On 2026-01-17 06:38, NoBody wrote:   
   > On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 11:19:59 -0800, Alan  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 2026-01-16 04:30, NoBody wrote:   
   >>>>>> 3. Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid intentionally and   
   >>>>>> unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no   
   >>>>>> alternative to using deadly force.'   
   >>>>> He did.  SHE changed that equation.   
   >>>> He chose to remain there when a single step to his right would have   
   >>>> taken him out of the danger area.   
   >>> Laughter!   
   >>>   
   >>> I love how you pretend to be an armchair expert on what could or could   
   >>> not have been done.  She weaponized her vehicle and he perceived a   
   >>> threat to his life and safety.  Legit shoot.   
   >>   
   >> If she'd intended to drive into him, she wouldn't have been turning her   
   >> steering wheel hard to the right...   
   >>   
   >   
   > Love how you armchair ICE agent.   
   >   
   > She reversed such that the vehicle was pointing towards him.   
      
   As he was walking to her left.   
      
   > She gunned the gas so much that her tires spun.   
      
   The road was slippery.   
      
   > She actually DID hit him.   
      
   That is unproven.   
      
   >   
   >> ...and therefore AWAY from him.   
   >   
   > Irrelevent since she weaponized her vehicle.   
   > Justified use of force.   
      
   Not according to any use of force policy that he could have been   
   operating under.   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> She saw a man moving across from her right to left, and how was she to   
   >> know he'd stop moving?   
   >   
   > Guess she should have made sure he was clear before she tried to run.   
      
   Maybe she would have if another agent hadn't rushed up with no warning   
   and grabbed her driver's side door.   
      
   >   
   > This is basic logic here and you blame HIM for HER decisions.   
      
   I blame HIM for HIS decisions.   
      
   Specifically:   
      
   The decision to stop in front of a vehicle that was in motion a moment   
   before and which he could see from the fact that she was steering to her   
   right was going to be in motion again in another moment...   
      
   ...in direct violation of policies regarding tactical positioning of   
   agents in such situations.   
      
      
   The decision to treat a vehicle as a threat when a step to his left   
   would have completely obviated the need to use deadly force...   
      
   ...in direct violation of his use of force policies.   
      
   Shall I quote them again for you?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)