XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: nuh-uh@nope.com   
      
   On 2026-01-19 14:38, Skeeter wrote:   
   > In article <10kma0i$nduj$7@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com   
   > says...   
   >>   
   >> On 2026-01-18 16:41, Skeeter wrote:   
   >>> In article <10kjrqc$3rq66$17@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   >>> uh@nope.com says...   
   >>>>   
   >>>> On 2026-01-18 15:52, Skeeter wrote:   
   >>>>> In article <10kjpuf$3rq66$8@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   >>>>> uh@nope.com says...   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 2026-01-17 15:37, Skeeter wrote:   
   >>>>>>> In article <10kh336$2tn8q$3@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   >>>>>>> uh@nope.com says...   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On 2026-01-15 16:29, Skeeter wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> His: tell us of his training. Tell us what HIS training was   
   when he was about   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be run over by a domestic insurrectionist terrorist, who   
   was blocking him   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and his fellow federal agents, from performing his/their   
   duties as ICE agents.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I thought you'd never ask!   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'Chapter 1: General Guidelines   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> WHOSE "guidelines?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> The Customs and Border Patrol's "Use of Force Policy".   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> All go out the window when someone is trying to run you   
   >>>>>>>>>>> over.   
   >>>>>>>>>> No. That is exactly when the policy comes into play.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Fuck the policy? You are just looking for an excuse to   
   >>>>>>>>> hate.   
   >>>>>>>> The policy exists to protect both law enforcement and citizens.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> He violated that policy to CREATE a threat.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> So you do admit it exists.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Admit what: that a policy exists which he violated?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> '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.'   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Admit we don't do court here like you do in commie   
   >>>>> KKKanada. The jury will also look at the things that   
   >>>>> happened and the reaction and realize that he was self   
   >>>>> defending. Happens a lot.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Not when the see he could simply have stepped out of the way.   
   >>>   
   >>> Nope. Reread what I wrote.   
   >>   
   >> Sure.   
   >>   
   >> Done.   
   >>   
   >> He could still have just kept walking and never been in a position to be   
   >> struck  at all.   
   >   
   > And she could have just kept driving and she would be   
   > alive today.   
      
   She attempted to just drive away...   
      
   ...and Jonathan Ross decided to stop walking while he was still   
   potentially in her path and was drawing his weapon before the car even   
   started moving forward.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)