XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.democrats   
   From: katt@gmail.com   
      
   On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 16:21:32 -0800,  Alan says...   
      
   > Look up "straw man argument".   
      
   Look up Red Herring, faggot.   
      
   ALL of your arguments are red herrings.   
      
   All you're doing is trying to hide the FACTS of the topic, with all bullshit   
   arguments you keep coming up with, like who's thinking what... how long was   
   Good parked... Ross could have stepped out of the way... all the things that   
   do not matter.   
      
   What matters is Good hit Ross... Ross protected himself and others, because NO   
   ONE, not even you faggot mind readers, knows what could have happened.   
      
   Law enforcement training and legal standards (specifically the "objective   
   reasonableness" standard) authorizes the use of deadly force if an   
   officer has a reasonable BELIEF THAT THE SUBJECT POSES AN IMMINENT THREAT OF   
   DEATH OR SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURY TO THE OFFICER OR OTHERS.   
      
   In the context of a vehicle, here are the primary reasons an officer can use   
   deadly force:   
      
   Vehicle as a Weapon: The driver is intentionally or recklessly driving the   
   vehicle toward an officer or a bystander, using the car's mass and speed as a   
   lethal instrument.   
      
   YOU have NO idea what was in Good's head, so do not go there. Fro the 649th   
   time... you can not read minds. ALL the officer had to go on, was that she'd   
   been criminally breaking the law by impeding law enforcement, i.e., DOING   
   THEIR JOBS, so when Ross walked up to her car, HE had only a few "clues" as to   
   what this dyke was up to. Then, when she did take off, A)  after having been   
   ORDERED to get out of the car and B) being told to stop (her car), Ross did   
   what MOST, if not all, LEOs would have done.   
      
   PREVENTING ESCAPE: Under specific legal precedents (like Tennessee v. Garner),   
   force may be used if the driver has committed a crime (impeding law   
   enforcement, IS a crime) and their escape poses a significant threat of death   
   or serious injury to the community. That's was an unknown, but YOU can rule   
   out, because of your feewings.   
      
   =============================================================================   
      
   "Trump Derangement Syndrome" Is a Real Mental Condition   
      
   All you need to know about "Trump Derangement Syndrome," or TDS.   
      
   "Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a mental condition in which a person has   
   been driven effectively insane due to their dislike of Donald Trump, to the   
   point at which they will abandon all logic and reason."   
      
   Justin Raimondo, the editorial director of Antiwar.com, wrote a piece in the   
   Los Angeles Times in 2016 that broke TDS down into three distinct phases or   
   stages:   
      
   "In the first stage of the disease, victims lose all sense of proportion. The   
   president-elect's every tweet provokes a firestorm, as if 140 characters were   
   all it took to change the world."   
      
   "The mid-level stages of TDS have a profound effect on the victim's   
   vocabulary: Sufferers speak a distinctive language consisting solely of   
   hyperbole."   
      
   "As TDS progresses, the afflicted lose the ability to distinguish fantasy from   
   reality."   
      
   The Point here is simple: TDS is, in the eyes of its adherents, the knee-jerk   
   opposition from liberals to anything and everything Trump does. If Trump   
   announced he was donating every dollar he's ever made, TDS sufferers would   
   suggest he was up to something nefarious, according to the logic of TDS.   
   There's nothing - not. one. thing. - that Trump could do or say that would be   
   received positively by TDSers.   
      
   The history of Trump Derangement Syndrome actually goes back to the early   
   2000s - a time when the idea of Trump as president was a punch line for late-   
   night comics and nothing more.   
      
   Wikipedia traces its roots to "Bush Derangement Syndrome" - a term first   
   coined by the late conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer back in 2003.   
   The condition, as Krauthammer defined it, was "the acute onset of paranoia in   
   otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency - nay -   
   the very existence of George W. Bush."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)