From: recscuba_google@huntzinger.com   
      
   On 1/27/26 17:20, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   > On Tue, 27 Jan 2026 14:18:35 -0500, -hh wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 1/27/26 08:41, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>> On Tue, 27 Jan 2026 06:41:37 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 2026-01-20, CrudeSausage  wrote:   
   >>>>> On Mon, 19 Jan 2026 02:58:08 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 2026-01-19, CrudeSausage  wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Jan 2026 02:27:55 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On 2026-01-19, chrisv  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> RonB wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> rbowman wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> RonB wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> He's not talking about buying it, he's talking about stealing   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> He wants it for its natural resources, which I'm guessing is   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> why Denmark still wants it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> I don't know why he's so intent but Denmark has never done   
   >>>>>>>>>>> anything with Greenland except sink money into supporting the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> natives.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> So what? Does that give Trump the "right" to steal it? The   
   >>>>>>>>>> greedy bastard.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Trump is out of control, no doubt.  I support the ICE actions,   
   >>>>>>>>> but the Greenland business is CRAZY.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> I support ICE actions also. But I don't support murdering an   
   >>>>>>>> unarmed woman.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> She and her repulsive "wife" were asking for it. Nobody asked them   
   >>>>>>> to block traffic, nobody asked them to ignore orders to move,   
   >>>>>>> nobody asked the victim to block ICE vehicles when they tried to   
   >>>>>>> pass, nobody asked her "wife" to antagonize an ICE agent and nobody   
   >>>>>>> asked her to drive off when she was ordered to get out of the car.   
   >>>>>>> She wanted trouble, she got it. She is not the innocent victim   
   >>>>>>> everyone is painting her as being.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Yes, she was a ring-tailed bitch. But you don't murder disorderly   
   >>>>>> people because you're frustrated with them. You arrest them and try   
   >>>>>> them in a court of law. There's no excuse for this murder. Period.   
   >>>>>> Apparently this particular ICE agent had gotten into a fight a month   
   >>>>>> earlier with another ICE agent. These are the kind of people who   
   >>>>>> shouldn't be hired for police work.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> She was asked to step out of the car and drove off instead, hitting   
   >>>>> an ICE agent right in front of her. Had she cooperated with the   
   >>>>> agents, she'd be alive today. Instead, she attempted to murder   
   >>>>> someone whether accidentally or intentionally. He felt threatened,   
   >>>>> and he shot. I would not have expected him or anyone else to do   
   >>>>> anything else. The fact that the media is trying to paint him as an   
   >>>>> uncontrollable, angry person just reminds me that they are retarded   
   >>>>> demons who will stoop to any level to defend their own demons.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The thug who shot her had *already moved out the way* of the car   
   >>>> before he shot her in the head. He shot her as the car was *passing   
   >>>> him.* Murder, no other word for it. He was out of control. Someone did   
   >>>> a piss-poor job of profiling him before hiring him for the job.   
   >>>> Someone mentioned that he had been in a fight with another ICE agent   
   >>>> just a month earlier. A trigger happy asshole.   
   >>>   
   >>> The facts:   
   >>>   
   >>> - She intentionally parked her car in the middle of the road to impede   
   >>> ICE's work.   
   >>> - Her wife was antagonizing the ICE agents as she did so.   
   >>> - She consistently blocked passing ICE vehicles.   
   >>> - She refused to get out of the way when ordered to do so.   
   >>> - She refused to get out of the car when ordered to do so.   
   >>> - She attempted to flee the scene of her crime after being asked to   
   >>> exit her vehicle.   
   >>> - In attempting to flee, she drove into an officer who shot her through   
   >>> her windshield from the front and again from the side.   
   >>>   
   >>> Everything else is propaganda.   
   >>   
   >> Not really:  there's also the Use of Force Policies for DOJ, CBP, & DHS   
   >> which have set very specific parameters for when it is legal for an   
   >> officer to use lethal force.   
   >>   
   >> In these, it specifically excludes shooting at a car where the   
   >> alternative is to step aside.  Similar documents specifically identify   
   >> standing in front of a car to try to contrive 'peril' as disallowed.   
   >   
   > She ran into him; she didn't warn him to step aside.   
      
   Videos haven't proven the claim that she hit him, particularly to the   
   point where Ross was justified to use lethal force.   
      
   What they have shown is contact made by Ross's iPhone-holding hand   
   slapping the hood.  Likewise, effectively an air gap between Ross's   
   thorax and the vehicle.   
      
   And what the DHS/CBP/DOJ Policies state on this matter are that if it is   
   objectively reasonable to get out of the way, to get out of the way.   
      
   Further, the best practices say to not put yourself in peril in the   
   first place.   
      
   > Everything you just wrote is ignoring what everyone with eyes and   
   > objectivity was able to see for themselves.   
      
      
   Rules of Engagement & Policies apply for the trained professional, and   
   there were multiple violations thereof.  Further, making an error is   
   never a justification to try to correct by escalating to lethal force.   
      
      
      
   > Nevertheless, we already know that sworn leftists ...   
      
   Unfortunately, stooping to name-calling invalidates your arguments.   
      
   >>> In fact, military experts have already been discussing how these   
   >>> tactics are the same as were generally being used by Communists in   
   >>> other countries to topple their governments.   
   >>   
   >> Oh?  Got the cite for that?  I'd like to read what my peers are saying.   
   >   
   >    
      
   Notice how he avoided addressing if ICE is following the Law?   
      
   Here's one that did:   
      
   [quote]   
   In all my firearms training classes, spanning 20+ years, with law   
   enforcement in the classes, plus Navy Seals, federal agents, sheriff   
   deputies, special forces operators, Texas Supreme Court justices and   
   more, spanning everything from pistols to rifles to long-range precision   
   shooting, the #1 lesson every instructor taught us was, "YOU are   
   responsible for every round that leaves the muzzle of your firearm."   
      
   Every member of law enforcement knows this. The ICE agent that shot Alex   
   Pretti owns every round. And if he dispatched those rounds into a human   
   being who was unarmed and did NOT pose an imminent threat of serious   
   injury or death to other agents (since Pretti was on his knees, disarmed   
   and being beaten in the face by other ICE agents), then the shooting of   
   him was a legally unjustified shooting.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)