XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: NoBody@nowhere.com   
      
   On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 15:01:21 -0800, Alan  wrote:   
      
   >On 2026-01-21 04:30, NoBody wrote:   
   >> On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 12:08:06 -0800, Alan  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 2026-01-15 16:04, Skeeter wrote:   
   >>>> In article <10kbt2b$15km6$13@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   >>>> uh@nope.com says...   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> On 2026-01-14 22:05, Skeeter wrote:   
   >>>>>> In article <10k9gk6$dphk$6@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com   
   >>>>>> says...   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On 2026-01-12 10:22, AlleyCat wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 08:45:54 -0800,  Alan says...   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> We'll wait.  This should be seriously amusing.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> The agent can be anywhere that he can see the windshield.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> And the bullet hole would show the path of a bullet coming in from a   
   side   
   >>>>>>>> angle. That bullet hole clearly shows it was fired from in front of   
   the   
   >>>>>>>> vehicle and NOT from the side.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> You know nothing about ballistics.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Are you claim that a person standing outside the line of the car's   
   sides   
   >>>>>>>>> can't SEE the windshield?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> You are one fucking idiot.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> How did the bullet go through the windshield from the side and hit   
   the driver?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Who says that that's the bullet that struck her?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> No matter. One of them did.  LOL   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Indeed.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> But what matters in terms of the use of deadly force is why he kept   
   >>>>> firing after there was no more threat to him.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> How do you know what he was thinking? You just want to   
   >>>> hate.   
   >>>   
   >>> I don't have to know what he was thinking.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Yet you judge him as if you no.   
   >   
   >Nope. I judge his ACTIONS.   
      
   Laughter.  His actions were correct.   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >>> He fired two more shots at a vehicle that was no longer a threat to him   
   >>> or to anyone else.   
   >>   
   >> Officers are trained to keep shooting until the threat is eliminated.   
   >> You judge him by something that happened in fewer than a few seconds.   
   >   
   >The "threat" was eliminated the moment he was beside the moving car.   
      
   She was confirmed as a threat to no one?  By whom?  When? And how   
   would that be determined in less than a second?   
      
   >   
   >The "threat" wouldn't have existed in the first place if he'd followed   
   >doctrine and not stopped in front of the car in the first place.   
   >   
      
   Laughter!  He was to the side until she backed up.  SHE made the   
   choices here.  He only reacted to HER choices.   
      
   >You know that there was a report on CBP officers CREATING a threat by   
   >doing just that, right?   
      
   Cite it and we'll discuss.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)