XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: nuh-uh@nope.com   
      
   On 2026-01-18 15:55, Skeeter wrote:   
   > 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.   
      
   He had a reasonable means of avoiding a threat even if one had been   
   intended. All he had to do was not stop walking where he did.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)