FLBear5630 said:
whiterock said:
FLBear5630 said:
Mothra said:
Redbrickbear said:
I've always found the Ashli Babbit "murdered" logic a bit absurd. She was no more murdered then if I shot an intruder entering my home.
I agree, do not get the murder part. She was part of the crowd pushing into Congress coming in through a broken window. If she followed the Capitol Police orders, she would be alive.
Fact: Deadly force was used against an unarmed woman climbing thru a broken window that few protesters would have been able to fit thru. She posed no threat of harm to anyone at the moment she was shot.
That is the standard which would be used in a court of law for a shooting anywhere else, i.e. it would not likely have been ruled a justified shooting. Is it reasonable to apply a different one here? Reasonable people can look at the context and see aggravating circumstances. And also not. She was inches away from (possibly touching) a federal officer when she was shot. That officer was not alone (other officers with him) and was not being attacked.
The officer who shot Babbitt clearly made a determination that anyone who penetrated that barrier would be shot. Subsequent investigation effectively ratified that decision. Whether it was justified or not......? He did not HAVE to do it. He had less-than-lethal options. Had he chosen less-than-lethal (a choice made everywhere else), physical restraints, etc...he would have been successful. But was that the "last line of defense?" Had Babbitt penetrated the "safe room?" Answers to these questions are never clearly a yes or no. Always a maybe, probably, apparently, etc.... And none of that that wouldn't be terribly controversial had it not involved use of deadly force.
The controversy is justified.
She was breaking and entering in the middle of a riot! You are normalizing coming through a window like she was walking through a park. This was not 2 people in a hallway and the cop shot her. Very disingenuous to say that Capital Policeman murdered her under the fog of those circumstances.
I didn't say the CAPO officer murdered her. I said she was breaking and entering, which is not normally considered a scenario justifying use of deadly force.
And yes, at the moment she was shot, the ONLY person in the hallway was the CAPO officer. You really need to look at the video. There were SWAT officers outside the door who had a small group of people there under control (i.e. not engaged in hand to hand combat as we saw outside). The group was arguing with the officers, who were barking orders. Babbitt sneaked by the SWAT officers and squeezed thru a slender window that most men could not have fit thru. While she was IN the window, the CAPO officer shot her from the side (i.e. Babbitt likely never saw him) and she fell back into the crowd (i.e. she never actually got THRU the window.)
The controversy is not whether she was breaking the law.
The controversy is whether or not deadly force was reasonable.
Some take your position = "Shoot 'em all, dammit!"
Others insist it was murder.
I am in the middle. It wasn't murder. It wasn't insurrection. Just a very questionable use of deadly force. An internal review cleared him. In most other circumstances, the officer's actions would have at least gone to a grand jury (unarmed victim posing no deadly threat to officer or others). And yes, sadly, race is a factor (not in the shooting itself, but in the controversy). The officer is black; the victim white. Critics of the officer see a double standard when compared to the events of the prior summer (Geo. Floyd scenarios). Personally, I doubt that had anything to do with it. But, again, given circumstances, we should not be surprised to see strong feelings on both sides.
