XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: invalid@none.com   
      
   In article <10kjqbu$3rq8m$15@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   uh@nope.com says...   
   >   
   > On 2026-01-16 20:54, Skeeter wrote:   
   > > In article <10kf27n$28hf2$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > > uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>   
   > >> On 2026-01-16 20:10, Skeeter wrote:   
   > >>> In article <10kerfe$268b0$2@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > >>> uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> On 2026-01-16 18:03, Skeeter wrote:   
   > >>>>> In article <10keh09$23gue$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > >>>>> uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> On 2026-01-16 15:12, Skeeter wrote:   
   > >>>>>>> In article <10ke2rs$1ui33$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > >>>>>>> uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>> On 2026-01-16 09:25, AlleyCat wrote:   
   > >>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 15:22:51 -0800,  Alan says...   
   > >>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>>> On 2026-01-14 22:52, AlleyCat wrote:   
   > >>>>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>>>> https://i.imgur.com/Tmcvpwi.mp4   
   > >>>>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 15:34:18 -0800,  Alan says...   
   > >>>>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>>>>> The "escaping vehicle" posed NO THREAT AT ALL.   
   > >>>>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>>>> YOU do not know that for a fact, faggot. So... you knew that the   
   roads were   
   > >>>>>>>>>>> clear all the way to where Good would have gone?   
   > >>>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>>> That's the standard?   
   > >>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>> Did I say that?   
   > >>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>> Yes. That's exactly what you said.   
   > >>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>> You suggest that it is OK to shoot someone because they might   
   encounter   
   > >>>>>>>> someone on the road at some point in the future.   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> No he didn't. You spun it around to sound like that.   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> Ummmm...nope!   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> "you knew that the roads were clear all the way to where Good would   
   have   
   > >>>>>> gone?"   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> That is Loser explicitly claiming that shooting her was justified by   
   the   
   > >>>>>> mere possibility that she'd encounter someone else on the road and   
   just   
   > >>>>>> randomly decide to run them down.   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>> You sure can turn a mole hill into a mountain.   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> Why was she making a U Turn/3 point turn on a one way   
   > >>>>>>> street?   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> Because she initially thought it wasn't a one way street.   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>> As she was driving down a "one way street"?  The street   
   > >>>>> had a lot of cars. Why would she decide to turn around and   
   > >>>>> it just by coincidence that there were ICE agents right   
   > >>>>> there doing their job when her wife started running and   
   > >>>>> taunting ICE. But you losers claim she didn't know who he   
   > >>>>> was. Are you that stupid?   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> Why didn't you address the fact that you first claimed it   
   > >>>>>>> was a U Turn and now call it a 3 point turn? Maybe you   
   > >>>>>>> should give yourself a break. You seem confused.   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> Please. "U-turn" can generically mean to turn around on a road.   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>> On a one way street? Was it a U Turn or a 3 point turn?   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> Yes.   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> I know this will come as a surprise to you, but people can make   
   mistakes.   
   > >>>   
   > >>> It had lots of cars all going the same direction.   
   > >>   
   > >> True. So?   
   > >   
   > > So why was she trying to turn around? I just shot your   
   > > bullshit story all to hell with your help.   
   > >>   
   > >>> She knew   
   > >>> where she was.   
   > >>   
   > >> How do you know that?   
   > >   
   > > Ask her wife. Now tell me how you knew what she was doing   
   > > and thinking.   
   > >>   
   > >>> If she didn't she shouldn't be driving and   
   > >>> that makes her a danger to herself and others.   
   > >>   
   > >> You think that otherwise completely competent drivers never find   
   > >> themselves on streets that they're not familiar with?   
   > >   
   > > But you said she dropped her kid off at school and was   
   > > heading home. So she knew where she was. You really suck   
   > > at this. You keep shooting yourself in the foot.   
   > >   
   In court theis is Alan:   
   >   
   > All of that is irrelevant in light of this:   
   >   
   > '2. Firearms may not be discharged solely to disable moving vehicles.   
   > Specifically, firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless:   
   > (1) a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person   
   > with deadly force by means other than the vehicle; or (2) the vehicle is   
   > operated in a manner that threatens to cause death or serious physical   
   > injury to the officer or others, and no other objectively reasonable   
   > means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path   
   > of the vehicle.'   
   >   
   > Read that last part until you get it:   
   >   
   > 'and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist,   
   > which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.'   
   >   
   > He had an "objectively reasonable means of defense":   
   >   
   > Taking one more step to his right.   
      
      
   The jusr and judge: Not guilty.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)