D. C. Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Don't jump through broken windows and you probably won't get shot at. What would you do if someone came through a window at your home?

---

I am with you. I don't see how you defend going through a broken window.

---

Geez, dude. What a terribly analogy. You're thinking here is a quarter-inch deep. It's not about whether she broke the law. It's about whether or not use of deadly force was authorized. Was SHE, at the moment the trigger was pulled, a threat to the life of the officer? No. Was SHE a threat to anyone else? No. She was unarmed and not posing a threat of life or harm to anyone....at that moment.

By the standard you are proposing, one could justify shooting every single person who entered the capital that day, and basically everyone else outside. Literally...."eh...kill 'em all...they shouldn't be here."

---

Of course it was about whether she broke the law. Look at the context that she broke it. The rioters broke a window and she climbed through it into the Speakers Chamber with the Secret Service and Capitol Police yelling not to enter with weapons drawn. Congressional members were inside. That was a hostile environment, she didn't listen to law enforcement and she breached through a secure area. And you wonder why she got shot????You act like she went into the wrong backyard during a Street Party.

Geez, your credibility is really taking a hit. You were in the military, didn't you even pull guard duty or have to secure a perimeter? She was wrong. She was a Veteran and should have known better. She was shot in the shoulder, it is bad luck she died but that was on her and her fellow rioters trying to break through that door.

Shallow thinking? watch the video. How anyone, especially someone with military experience, can watch that and come away with law enforcement overreacted is beyond me. I hope I don't ever have to rely on you for providing security.

---

DUDE! Listen to yourself. You are literally arguing that breaking any law justifies use of deadly force.

We have a well developed code of law which holds that deadly force is only used when someone poses an imminent risk to life or grievous harm to another. We issue tasers to police so that they can subdue criminals resisting arrest without having to escalate force in ways that might create deadly force scenarios (scuffle to handcuff turns into perp trying to seize the officer's weapon....perp getting physical advantage and beating, choking officer, etc....).

She was unarmed......
In any other scenario, tasers would have been the go-to application of force.

(We just refitted our entire police force with new tasers. You would not believe what those things cost.)

---

Unarmed? How did the officer know that? She was coming through a broken window with a backpack in the middle of a riot. This is what he saw. Unarmed? They found pipe bombs out there in, a backpack. Don't tell me, they didn't go off. So, now incompetence is a reason not to defend?

I get it, you like Trump and don't like the Dems. The Dems are a trainwreck, get it. But to condone this? Especially as a former Officer that took the oath?

---

He could see her hands?

I'm not even saying it was a "bad shoot," but I am saying it isn't as clear as you would like it to be that it was a justified killing or, as some have argued, that it was a criminal act.

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Don't jump through broken windows and you probably won't get shot at. What would you do if someone came through a window at your home?

---

I am with you. I don't see how you defend going through a broken window.

---

Geez, dude. What a terribly analogy. You're thinking here is a quarter-inch deep. It's not about whether she broke the law. It's about whether or not use of deadly force was authorized. Was SHE, at the moment the trigger was pulled, a threat to the life of the officer? No. Was SHE a threat to anyone else? No. She was unarmed and not posing a threat of life or harm to anyone....at that moment.

By the standard you are proposing, one could justify shooting every single person who entered the capital that day, and basically everyone else outside. Literally...."eh...kill 'em all...they shouldn't be here."

---

Of course it was about whether she broke the law. Look at the context that she broke it. The rioters broke a window and she climbed through it into the Speakers Chamber with the Secret Service and Capitol Police yelling not to enter with weapons drawn. Congressional members were inside. That was a hostile environment, she didn't listen to law enforcement and she breached through a secure area. And you wonder why she got shot????You act like she went into the wrong backyard during a Street Party.

Geez, your credibility is really taking a hit. You were in the military, didn't you even pull guard duty or have to secure a perimeter? She was wrong. She was a Veteran and should have known better. She was shot in the shoulder, it is bad luck she died but that was on her and her fellow rioters trying to break through that door.

Shallow thinking? watch the video. How anyone, especially someone with military experience, can watch that and come away with law enforcement overreacted is beyond me. I hope I don't ever have to rely on you for providing security.

---

DUDE! Listen to yourself. You are literally arguing that breaking any law justifies use of deadly force.

We have a well developed code of law which holds that deadly force is only used when someone poses an imminent risk to life or grievous harm to another. We issue tasers to police so that they can subdue criminals resisting arrest without having to escalate force in ways that might create deadly force scenarios (scuffle to handcuff turns into perp trying to seize the officer's weapon....perp getting physical advantage and beating, choking officer, etc....).

She was unarmed......
In any other scenario, tasers would have been the go-to application of force.

(We just refitted our entire police force with new tasers. You would not believe what those things cost.)

---

Unarmed? How did the officer know that? She was coming through a broken window with a backpack in the middle of a riot. This is what he saw. Unarmed? They found pipe bombs out there in, a backpack. Don't tell me, they didn't go off. So, now incompetence is a reason not to defend?

I get it, you like Trump and don't like the Dems. The Dems are a trainwreck, get it. But to condone this? Especially as a former Officer that took the oath?

---

He could see her hands?

I'm not even saying it was a "bad shoot," but I am saying it isn't as clear as you would like it to be that it was a justified killing or, as some have argued, that it was a criminal act.

---

He shot her in the shoulder, it was not a headshot. It is a tragedy she is dead, but I do not see the cop as doing anything wrong, especially not criminal in that situation.

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wrecks Quan Dough said:

---

Don't jump through broken windows and you probably won't get shot at. What would you do if someone came through a window at your home?

---

I am with you. I don't see how you defend going through a broken window.

---

Geez, dude. What a terribly analogy. You're thinking here is a quarter-inch deep. It's not about whether she broke the law. It's about whether or not use of deadly force was authorized. Was SHE, at the moment the trigger was pulled, a threat to the life of the officer? No. Was SHE a threat to anyone else? No. She was unarmed and not posing a threat of life or harm to anyone....at that moment.

By the standard you are proposing, one could justify shooting every single person who entered the capital that day, and basically everyone else outside. Literally...."eh...kill 'em all...they shouldn't be here."

---

Of course it was about whether she broke the law. Look at the context that she broke it. The rioters broke a window and she climbed through it into the Speakers Chamber with the Secret Service and Capitol Police yelling not to enter with weapons drawn. Congressional members were inside. That was a hostile environment, she didn't listen to law enforcement and she breached through a secure area. And you wonder why she got shot????You act like she went into the wrong backyard during a Street Party.

Geez, your credibility is really taking a hit. You were in the military, didn't you even pull guard duty or have to secure a perimeter? She was wrong. She was a Veteran and should have known better. She was shot in the shoulder, it is bad luck she died but that was on her and her fellow rioters trying to break through that door.

Shallow thinking? watch the video. How anyone, especially someone with military experience, can watch that and come away with law enforcement overreacted is beyond me. I hope I don't ever have to rely on you for providing security.

---

DUDE! Listen to yourself. You are literally arguing that breaking any law justifies use of deadly force.

We have a well developed code of law which holds that deadly force is only used when someone poses an imminent risk to life or grievous harm to another. We issue tasers to police so that they can subdue criminals resisting arrest without having to escalate force in ways that might create deadly force scenarios (scuffle to handcuff turns into perp trying to seize the officer's weapon....perp getting physical advantage and beating, choking officer, etc....).

She was unarmed......
In any other scenario, tasers would have been the go-to application of force.

(We just refitted our entire police force with new tasers. You would not believe what those things cost.)

---

Unarmed? How did the officer know that? She was coming through a broken window with a backpack in the middle of a riot. This is what he saw. Unarmed? They found pipe bombs out there in, a backpack. Don't tell me, they didn't go off. So, now incompetence is a reason not to defend?

I get it, you like Trump and don't like the Dems. The Dems are a trainwreck, get it. But to condone this? Especially as a former Officer that took the oath?

---

He could see her hands?

I'm not even saying it was a "bad shoot," but I am saying it isn't as clear as you would like it to be that it was a justified killing or, as some have argued, that it was a criminal act.

---

He shot her in the shoulder, it was not a headshot. It is a tragedy she is dead, but I do not see the cop as doing anything wrong, especially not criminal in that situation.

---

I think he acted recklessly and discharged his fire arm without real need.

Obviously people are not going to agree on this topic.

But its legitimate to criticize his actions.

---

Kevin McCarthy has resorted to assaulting his colleagues in order to get revenge on the members of Congress who voted to remove him as House Speaker and stop his blank checks to foreign countries. pic.twitter.com/qw66FuwtpT

— Lauren Witzke (@LaurenWitzkeDE) November 14, 2023

You literally represent territory America gained after a war you utter moron. https://t.co/Nr0mc1OusV

— Old Tory Right - Bulltard Strength-📈🐂🏴 (@rightwingnutrs) November 27, 2023

Unless it’s a meme about dumping tea in the harbor, history before the current world order is nonexistent to these people.

If you were to ask McCarthy about the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo he would literally start drooling. https://t.co/Bw03pp3KRD

— Bushwhacker (@anglotradboy) November 27, 2023

People who implicitly believe America was founded in 1945 are both dumb and correct. It's simply that there was another America that used to occupy the same geographic territory, similar to how we refer to the Qing Dynasty and China today both as 'China' https://t.co/dRwibW0I2Y

— Evil (Political) Scientist (@knrd_z) November 27, 2023

🚨🚨🚨 MCCARTHY is leaving Congress at the end of this year

“It is in this spirit that I have decided to depart the House at the end of this year to serve America in new ways. I know my work is only getting started.”https://t.co/BdWAcm3WXZ

— Reese Gorman (@reesejgorman) December 6, 2023

Community Notes makes a mockery of Kevin McCarthy months after his original tweet. pic.twitter.com/ayvnF0XQxL

— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) December 6, 2023

Gets removed as speaker for refusal to honor promises and undermining of any pushback.

Organizes removal of Santos. Reduces an already slim majority.

Announces retirement days later.

Hard to imagine a bigger POS in the GOP. https://t.co/zl9OS73LY6

— Jeff Carlson (@themarketswork) December 6, 2023