Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

You are now backpedaling and making other unverified claims.

You can see by the video there were only a few protestors at the doors to the Senate Chamber (not a large mob).

Now again..maybe it was a justified shot and maybe it was not

The officers outside the door did not feel the need to shoot.

Point being that if we are comparing two female protestors being shot by officers of the law…the one coming at an officer with a car is probably objectively more understandable… in terms of making a active fire decision… than the other one just standing and pounding on a glass door next to officers.

The lesson should be don't ignore police orders and don't put yourself in very dangerous situations/confrontations with law enforcement.

But you are spinning the Ashli Babbit shooting to fit your ideological narrative

---

Q: I spoke to Renee Good’s father who is a big supporter of yours… he’s heartbroken right now. What do you say to the father?

Trump: I want to say to the father that I love all of our people… When you look at that tape it can be viewed two ways, I guess pic.twitter.com/Ipf5EPGWZU

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) January 14, 2026

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

You are now backpedaling and making other unverified claims.

You can see by the video there were only a few protestors at the doors to the Senate Chamber (not a large mob).

Now again..maybe it was a justified shot and maybe it was not

The officers outside the door did not feel the need to shoot.

Point being that if we are comparing two female protestors being shot by officers of the law…the one coming at an officer with a car is probably objectively more understandable… in terms of making a active fire decision… than the other one just standing and pounding on a glass door next to officers.

The lesson should be don't ignore police orders and don't put yourself in very dangerous situations/confrontations with law enforcement.

But you are spinning the Ashli Babbit shooting to fit your ideological narrative

---

I'm doing what I've always done as an outside observer to police shooting cases, which is to evaluate them according to the law and the facts as best we know them. More often than not I've found the actions justified. Whether they were justified or not, in all but one or two cases my conclusions have been borne out by investigations or trials. This board certainly doesn't need my help producing predictable, ideologically based opinions.

---

Then you need to go back and watch both videos of both shootings (from multiple angles)

Ashli Babbit was unarmed and standing so close to other officers as to nearly touch them. She was banging on the glass door when shot.

Mrs Goode was also close to officers and attempting to drive forward with an officer right in front of her large SUV when she was shot.

Both made women poor choices and ignored police orders.

Yet you have defended one shooting (and done so while pushing some subjective/suspect info)

And at the same time you have been very critical of the other.

Your own ideology/political values seems to be coloring your views on these two law enforcement shootings

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

You are now backpedaling and making other unverified claims.

You can see by the video there were only a few protestors at the doors to the Senate Chamber (not a large mob).

Now again..maybe it was a justified shot and maybe it was not

The officers outside the door did not feel the need to shoot.

Point being that if we are comparing two female protestors being shot by officers of the law…the one coming at an officer with a car is probably objectively more understandable… in terms of making a active fire decision… than the other one just standing and pounding on a glass door next to officers.

The lesson should be don't ignore police orders and don't put yourself in very dangerous situations/confrontations with law enforcement.

But you are spinning the Ashli Babbit shooting to fit your ideological narrative

---

I'm doing what I've always done as an outside observer to police shooting cases, which is to evaluate them according to the law and the facts as best we know them. More often than not I've found the actions justified. Whether they were justified or not, in all but one or two cases my conclusions have been borne out by investigations or trials. This board certainly doesn't need my help producing predictable, ideologically based opinions.

---

Then you need to go back and watch both videos of both shootings (from multiple angles)

Ashli Babbit was unarmed and standing so close to other officers as to nearly touch them. She was banging on the glass door when shot.

Mrs Goode was also close to officers and attempting to drive forward with an officer right in front of her large SUV when she was shot.

Both made women poor choices and ignored police orders.

Yet you have defended one shooting (and done so while pushing some subjective/suspect info)

And at the same time you have been very critical of the other.

Your own ideology/political values seems to be coloring your views on these two law enforcement shootings

---

J6 apologists have a bad habit of taking images out of context to justify their position. The fact that the officers outside the door weren't shooting doesn't mean they weren't in a volatile and dangerous situation. They were badly outnumbered and exposed. Their best course of action was to de-escalate (you know, like cops are supposed to be trained to do).

The officer who shot Babbitt was in a different position. He was behind the last line of defense, with Congress members in sight, and he needed to hold it as long as possible. When she started breaking through the door (not just banging on it), the time to de-escalate ran out.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

You are now backpedaling and making other unverified claims.

You can see by the video there were only a few protestors at the doors to the Senate Chamber (not a large mob).

Now again..maybe it was a justified shot and maybe it was not

The officers outside the door did not feel the need to shoot.

Point being that if we are comparing two female protestors being shot by officers of the law…the one coming at an officer with a car is probably objectively more understandable… in terms of making a active fire decision… than the other one just standing and pounding on a glass door next to officers.

The lesson should be don't ignore police orders and don't put yourself in very dangerous situations/confrontations with law enforcement.

But you are spinning the Ashli Babbit shooting to fit your ideological narrative

---

I'm doing what I've always done as an outside observer to police shooting cases, which is to evaluate them according to the law and the facts as best we know them. More often than not I've found the actions justified. Whether they were justified or not, in all but one or two cases my conclusions have been borne out by investigations or trials. This board certainly doesn't need my help producing predictable, ideologically based opinions.

---

Then you need to go back and watch both videos of both shootings (from multiple angles)

Ashli Babbit was unarmed and standing so close to other officers as to nearly touch them. She was banging on the glass door when shot.

Mrs Goode was also close to officers and attempting to drive forward with an officer right in front of her large SUV when she was shot.

Both made women poor choices and ignored police orders.

Yet you have defended one shooting (and done so while pushing some subjective/suspect info)

And at the same time you have been very critical of the other.

Your own ideology/political values seems to be coloring your views on these two law enforcement shootings

---

J6 apologists have a bad habit of taking images out of context to justify their position. The fact that the officers outside the door weren't shooting doesn't mean they weren't in a volatile and dangerous situation. They were badly outnumbered and exposed. Their best course of action was to de-escalate (you know, like cops are supposed to be trained to do).

The officer who shot Babbitt was in a different position. He was behind the last line of defense, with Congress members in sight, and he needed to hold it as long as possible. When she started breaking through the door (not just banging on it), the time to de-escalate ran out.

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

You are now backpedaling and making other unverified claims.

You can see by the video there were only a few protestors at the doors to the Senate Chamber (not a large mob).

Now again..maybe it was a justified shot and maybe it was not

The officers outside the door did not feel the need to shoot.

Point being that if we are comparing two female protestors being shot by officers of the law…the one coming at an officer with a car is probably objectively more understandable… in terms of making a active fire decision… than the other one just standing and pounding on a glass door next to officers.

The lesson should be don't ignore police orders and don't put yourself in very dangerous situations/confrontations with law enforcement.

But you are spinning the Ashli Babbit shooting to fit your ideological narrative

---

I'm doing what I've always done as an outside observer to police shooting cases, which is to evaluate them according to the law and the facts as best we know them. More often than not I've found the actions justified. Whether they were justified or not, in all but one or two cases my conclusions have been borne out by investigations or trials. This board certainly doesn't need my help producing predictable, ideologically based opinions.

---

Then you need to go back and watch both videos of both shootings (from multiple angles)

Ashli Babbit was unarmed and standing so close to other officers as to nearly touch them. She was banging on the glass door when shot.

Mrs Goode was also close to officers and attempting to drive forward with an officer right in front of her large SUV when she was shot.

Both made women poor choices and ignored police orders.

Yet you have defended one shooting (and done so while pushing some subjective/suspect info)

And at the same time you have been very critical of the other.

Your own ideology/political values seems to be coloring your views on these two law enforcement shootings

---

J6 apologists have a bad habit of taking images out of context to justify their position. The fact that the officers outside the door weren't shooting doesn't mean they weren't in a volatile and dangerous situation. They were badly outnumbered and exposed. Their best course of action was to de-escalate (you know, like cops are supposed to be trained to do).

The officer who shot Babbitt was in a different position. He was behind the last line of defense, with Congress members in sight, and he needed to hold it as long as possible. When she started breaking through the door (not just banging on it), the time to de-escalate ran out.

---

Yes you have been extremely supportive of the shooting of Ashli Babbit.

You have done so by inserting your own beliefs into your response.

Since we can't know what the officers next to Mrs. Babbit were thinking (we just know they did not open fire on her)

You of course claim to know what they were thinking and that it was justified.

You also claim a "mob" was behind her. (In reality it was a few individuals)

But then you criticism a similar shooting where an officer was faced with an individual ignoring police commands and driving a SUV toward him.

You are a full on supporter of the Ashli Babbit fatal shooting and a negative opponent of the Renee Good shooting

Pretty obvious you are not a objective observer of these events but a person who makes determinations based on his own political/ideological views

---

People not from here do not understand the concept of Lawrence, KS. Think: Austin, TX on a much smaller scale with way less hot women. https://t.co/fAFu9p1FOm

— Nate’s Colossal Johnson (@wabashyourass) January 13, 2026

The_barBEARian said:

---

Sam you are an interesting fellow... when it comes to foreign policy, you are one of the smartest posters on this board... but when it comes to domestic policy, specifically domestic social policy, you are one of the dumbest guys on this board.

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

You are now backpedaling and making other unverified claims.

You can see by the video there were only a few protestors at the doors to the Senate Chamber (not a large mob).

Now again..maybe it was a justified shot and maybe it was not

The officers outside the door did not feel the need to shoot.

Point being that if we are comparing two female protestors being shot by officers of the law…the one coming at an officer with a car is probably objectively more understandable… in terms of making a active fire decision… than the other one just standing and pounding on a glass door next to officers.

The lesson should be don't ignore police orders and don't put yourself in very dangerous situations/confrontations with law enforcement.

But you are spinning the Ashli Babbit shooting to fit your ideological narrative

---

I'm doing what I've always done as an outside observer to police shooting cases, which is to evaluate them according to the law and the facts as best we know them. More often than not I've found the actions justified. Whether they were justified or not, in all but one or two cases my conclusions have been borne out by investigations or trials. This board certainly doesn't need my help producing predictable, ideologically based opinions.

---

Then you need to go back and watch both videos of both shootings (from multiple angles)

Ashli Babbit was unarmed and standing so close to other officers as to nearly touch them. She was banging on the glass door when shot.

Renee Good was also close to officers and attempting to drive forward with an officer right in front of her large SUV when she was shot.

Both women made poor choices and ignored police orders.

Yet you have defended one shooting (and done so while pushing some subjective/suspect info)

And at the same time you have been very critical of the other.

Your own ideology/political values seems to be coloring your views on these two law enforcement shootings

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

You are now backpedaling and making other unverified claims.

You can see by the video there were only a few protestors at the doors to the Senate Chamber (not a large mob).

Now again..maybe it was a justified shot and maybe it was not

The officers outside the door did not feel the need to shoot.

Point being that if we are comparing two female protestors being shot by officers of the law…the one coming at an officer with a car is probably objectively more understandable… in terms of making a active fire decision… than the other one just standing and pounding on a glass door next to officers.

The lesson should be don't ignore police orders and don't put yourself in very dangerous situations/confrontations with law enforcement.

But you are spinning the Ashli Babbit shooting to fit your ideological narrative

---

I'm doing what I've always done as an outside observer to police shooting cases, which is to evaluate them according to the law and the facts as best we know them. More often than not I've found the actions justified. Whether they were justified or not, in all but one or two cases my conclusions have been borne out by investigations or trials. This board certainly doesn't need my help producing predictable, ideologically based opinions.

---

Then you need to go back and watch both videos of both shootings (from multiple angles)

Ashli Babbit was unarmed and standing so close to other officers as to nearly touch them. She was banging on the glass door when shot.

Mrs Goode was also close to officers and attempting to drive forward with an officer right in front of her large SUV when she was shot.

Both made women poor choices and ignored police orders.

Yet you have defended one shooting (and done so while pushing some subjective/suspect info)

And at the same time you have been very critical of the other.

Your own ideology/political values seems to be coloring your views on these two law enforcement shootings

---

J6 apologists have a bad habit of taking images out of context to justify their position. The fact that the officers outside the door weren't shooting doesn't mean they weren't in a volatile and dangerous situation. They were badly outnumbered and exposed. Their best course of action was to de-escalate (you know, like cops are supposed to be trained to do).

The officer who shot Babbitt was in a different position. He was behind the last line of defense, with Congress members in sight, and he needed to hold it as long as possible. When she started breaking through the door (not just banging on it), the time to de-escalate ran out.

---

Yes you have been extremely supportive of the shooting of Ashli Babbit.

You have done so by inserting your own beliefs into your response.

Since we can't know what the officers next to Mrs. Babbit were thinking (we just know they did not open fire on her)

You of course claim to know what they were thinking and that it was justified.

You also claim a "mob" was behind her. (In reality it was a few individuals)

But then you criticism a similar shooting where an officer was faced with an individual ignoring police commands and driving a SUV toward him.

You are a full on supporter of the Ashli Babbit fatal shooting and a negative opponent of the Renee Good shooting

Pretty obvious you are not a objective observer of these events but a person who makes determinations based on his own political/ideological views

---

It was more than a few individuals. We have interviews with officers explaining their helplessness in the situation and the need to stall and divert instead of confronting. In any case, what other officers were thinking isn't what justified the shooting. It was justified objectively by the facts I described.

The ICE shooting is a close call and may yet prove to be justified when all the evidence is in. None of the available video gives as clear a view as one would hope. But if the officer was able to get out of the way while firing the shots, it stands to reason that he could have done so without firing the shots.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

You are now backpedaling and making other unverified claims.

You can see by the video there were only a few protestors at the doors to the Senate Chamber (not a large mob).

Now again..maybe it was a justified shot and maybe it was not

The officers outside the door did not feel the need to shoot.

Point being that if we are comparing two female protestors being shot by officers of the law…the one coming at an officer with a car is probably objectively more understandable… in terms of making a active fire decision… than the other one just standing and pounding on a glass door next to officers.

The lesson should be don't ignore police orders and don't put yourself in very dangerous situations/confrontations with law enforcement.

But you are spinning the Ashli Babbit shooting to fit your ideological narrative

---

I'm doing what I've always done as an outside observer to police shooting cases, which is to evaluate them according to the law and the facts as best we know them. More often than not I've found the actions justified. Whether they were justified or not, in all but one or two cases my conclusions have been borne out by investigations or trials. This board certainly doesn't need my help producing predictable, ideologically based opinions.

---

Then you need to go back and watch both videos of both shootings (from multiple angles)

Ashli Babbit was unarmed and standing so close to other officers as to nearly touch them. She was banging on the glass door when shot.

Mrs Goode was also close to officers and attempting to drive forward with an officer right in front of her large SUV when she was shot.

Both made women poor choices and ignored police orders.

Yet you have defended one shooting (and done so while pushing some subjective/suspect info)

And at the same time you have been very critical of the other.

Your own ideology/political values seems to be coloring your views on these two law enforcement shootings

---

J6 apologists have a bad habit of taking images out of context to justify their position. The fact that the officers outside the door weren't shooting doesn't mean they weren't in a volatile and dangerous situation. They were badly outnumbered and exposed. Their best course of action was to de-escalate (you know, like cops are supposed to be trained to do).

The officer who shot Babbitt was in a different position. He was behind the last line of defense, with Congress members in sight, and he needed to hold it as long as possible. When she started breaking through the door (not just banging on it), the time to de-escalate ran out.

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Sam you are an interesting fellow... when it comes to foreign policy, you are one of the smartest posters on this board... but when it comes to domestic policy, specifically domestic social policy, you are one of the dumbest guys on this board.

---

Rogan: ICE are villains. And they're masked up, which is also a problem, right? Because if you get arrested by a cop, you, you're allowed to ask the cop, what is your name and badge number. If you get arrested by an ICE agent, you have no such right. They're wearing a mask. They… pic.twitter.com/tFvtc9a9a2

— FactPost (@factpostnews) January 13, 2026

Sam Lowry said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Sam you are an interesting fellow... when it comes to foreign policy, you are one of the smartest posters on this board... but when it comes to domestic policy, specifically domestic social policy, you are one of the dumbest guys on this board.

---

Ukrainian Nazis = bad

American Nazis = also bad

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Sam you are an interesting fellow... when it comes to foreign policy, you are one of the smartest posters on this board... but when it comes to domestic policy, specifically domestic social policy, you are one of the dumbest guys on this board.

---

Ukrainian Nazis = bad

American Nazis = also bad

---

"Its those dirty Hhhhuuuiiiiite people!!!"

"Tell me where the mean white person touched you?"

Ok... I get it now... you hate white people.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Sam you are an interesting fellow... when it comes to foreign policy, you are one of the smartest posters on this board... but when it comes to domestic policy, specifically domestic social policy, you are one of the dumbest guys on this board.

---

Ukrainian Nazis = bad

American Nazis = also bad

---

"Its those dirty Hhhhuuuiiiiite people!!!"

"Tell me where the mean white person touched you?"

Ok... I get it now... you hate white people.

---

Substitute "Jews" for "white people," and this nonsense could have been written by 90% of the posters here.

No idea why everyone on all sides is so obsessed with race and identity.

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Forest Bueller III said:

---

Mothra said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

This individual was arrested for assaulting federal law enforcement officers under 18 U.S.C 111, assaulting, resisting, or impeding federal officers. https://t.co/792ZWVyXPU

— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) January 12, 2026

---

I know of no law that says you have the right to resist arrest, even if wrongfully detained. There are civil lawsuits filed everyday based on violations of the constitution. This guy might have a case. But that doesn't mean you can take the law into your own hands.

---

This incident is emblematic of my major issue with these "raids".

They are just "fishing" they have no idea who is or who isn't illegal.

Everybody would have issue with them doing this to their own American citizen child,
who might have gotten a great tan over the summer and suddenly be targeted.

---

Agree on this, and have several clients affected by it. But even if my son was targeted, my advice would be to comply with the officer's requests, and not resist arrest, unless he wants to get seriously injured or even killed.

We have the judiciary to sort out the details.

---

Who are you complying with? We are now seeing "fake" ICE, people who are wearing military gear and harassing people on the street because ICE is not identifying themselves.

This is a sad time in our history. There's a video of a handcuffed female detainee being taken into a portapotty by an ICE agent while his partner stays in the car.

And none of this is remotely effective.

---

Oh no! Well I guess we can't enforce immigration laws anymore. Darn it.

---

Don't be obtuse. What other law do we enforce by grabbing random people and forcing them to prove their innocence?

Maybe we should militarize the IRS and have them grave citizens in Highland Park and force them to show their tax returns or set up road blocks to make sure everyone has a license.

Mr. Chung, it's not happening to you, so it's ok?

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Forest Bueller III said:

---

Mothra said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

This individual was arrested for assaulting federal law enforcement officers under 18 U.S.C 111, assaulting, resisting, or impeding federal officers. https://t.co/792ZWVyXPU

— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) January 12, 2026

---

I know of no law that says you have the right to resist arrest, even if wrongfully detained. There are civil lawsuits filed everyday based on violations of the constitution. This guy might have a case. But that doesn't mean you can take the law into your own hands.

---

This incident is emblematic of my major issue with these "raids".

They are just "fishing" they have no idea who is or who isn't illegal.

Everybody would have issue with them doing this to their own American citizen child,
who might have gotten a great tan over the summer and suddenly be targeted.

---

Agree on this, and have several clients affected by it. But even if my son was targeted, my advice would be to comply with the officer's requests, and not resist arrest, unless he wants to get seriously injured or even killed.

We have the judiciary to sort out the details.

---

Who are you complying with? We are now seeing "fake" ICE, people who are wearing military gear and harassing people on the street because ICE is not identifying themselves.

This is a sad time in our history. There's a video of a handcuffed female detainee being taken into a portapotty by an ICE agent while his partner stays in the car.

And none of this is remotely effective.

---

Oh no! Well I guess we can't enforce immigration laws anymore. Darn it.

---

Don't be obtuse. What other law do we enforce by grabbing random people and forcing them to prove their innocence?

Maybe we should militarize the IRS and have them grave citizens in Highland Park and force them to show their tax returns or set up road blocks to make sure everyone has a license.

Mr. Chung, it's not happening to you, so it's ok?

---

By masked agents? If being asked to prove your innocence you should have the right to see your accuser. This is South American death squad stuff, not US Federal Agents.

2 years ago there was out cry on this Board about the tacticalization of the Federal Government and law enforcement, not to mention the weaponization of Agencies. Now under Trump it is not only ok, but growing.

---

Are you comparing ICE going after foreign invaders to the FBI going after Jan 6ers?

One group came here to loot and pillage, the other group came to stop their own government from stealing an election.

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Forest Bueller III said:

---

Mothra said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

This individual was arrested for assaulting federal law enforcement officers under 18 U.S.C 111, assaulting, resisting, or impeding federal officers. https://t.co/792ZWVyXPU

— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) January 12, 2026

---

I know of no law that says you have the right to resist arrest, even if wrongfully detained. There are civil lawsuits filed everyday based on violations of the constitution. This guy might have a case. But that doesn't mean you can take the law into your own hands.

---

This incident is emblematic of my major issue with these "raids".

They are just "fishing" they have no idea who is or who isn't illegal.

Everybody would have issue with them doing this to their own American citizen child,
who might have gotten a great tan over the summer and suddenly be targeted.

---

Agree on this, and have several clients affected by it. But even if my son was targeted, my advice would be to comply with the officer's requests, and not resist arrest, unless he wants to get seriously injured or even killed.

We have the judiciary to sort out the details.

---

Who are you complying with? We are now seeing "fake" ICE, people who are wearing military gear and harassing people on the street because ICE is not identifying themselves.

This is a sad time in our history. There's a video of a handcuffed female detainee being taken into a portapotty by an ICE agent while his partner stays in the car.

And none of this is remotely effective.

---

Oh no! Well I guess we can't enforce immigration laws anymore. Darn it.

---

Don't be obtuse. What other law do we enforce by grabbing random people and forcing them to prove their innocence?

Maybe we should militarize the IRS and have them grave citizens in Highland Park and force them to show their tax returns or set up road blocks to make sure everyone has a license.

Mr. Chung, it's not happening to you, so it's ok?

---

By masked agents? If being asked to prove your innocence you should have the right to see your accuser. This is South American death squad stuff, not US Federal Agents.

2 years ago there was out cry on this Board about the tacticalization of the Federal Government and law enforcement, not to mention the weaponization of Agencies. Now under Trump it is not only ok, but growing.

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The officers outside the door had done everything they could to slow the crowd's advance, but they were cornered and in no position to do anything more. By all accounts they were distressed enough. They would have been even more distressed if the door had come down and they'd found themselves caught between it and an onrushing mob.

---

You are now backpedaling and making other unverified claims.

You can see by the video there were only a few protestors at the doors to the Senate Chamber (not a large mob).

Now again..maybe it was a justified shot and maybe it was not

The officers outside the door did not feel the need to shoot.

Point being that if we are comparing two female protestors being shot by officers of the law…the one coming at an officer with a car is probably objectively more understandable… in terms of making a active fire decision… than the other one just standing and pounding on a glass door next to officers.

The lesson should be don't ignore police orders and don't put yourself in very dangerous situations/confrontations with law enforcement.

But you are spinning the Ashli Babbit shooting to fit your ideological narrative

---

I'm doing what I've always done as an outside observer to police shooting cases, which is to evaluate them according to the law and the facts as best we know them. More often than not I've found the actions justified. Whether they were justified or not, in all but one or two cases my conclusions have been borne out by investigations or trials. This board certainly doesn't need my help producing predictable, ideologically based opinions.

---

Then you need to go back and watch both videos of both shootings (from multiple angles)

Ashli Babbit was unarmed and standing so close to other officers as to nearly touch them. She was banging on the glass door when shot.

Mrs Goode was also close to officers and attempting to drive forward with an officer right in front of her large SUV when she was shot.

Both made women poor choices and ignored police orders.

Yet you have defended one shooting (and done so while pushing some subjective/suspect info)

And at the same time you have been very critical of the other.

Your own ideology/political values seems to be coloring your views on these two law enforcement shootings

---

Yep, like a fan watching instant replay.

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Forest Bueller III said:

---

Mothra said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

This individual was arrested for assaulting federal law enforcement officers under 18 U.S.C 111, assaulting, resisting, or impeding federal officers. https://t.co/792ZWVyXPU

— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) January 12, 2026

---

I know of no law that says you have the right to resist arrest, even if wrongfully detained. There are civil lawsuits filed everyday based on violations of the constitution. This guy might have a case. But that doesn't mean you can take the law into your own hands.

---

This incident is emblematic of my major issue with these "raids".

They are just "fishing" they have no idea who is or who isn't illegal.

Everybody would have issue with them doing this to their own American citizen child,
who might have gotten a great tan over the summer and suddenly be targeted.

---

Agree on this, and have several clients affected by it. But even if my son was targeted, my advice would be to comply with the officer's requests, and not resist arrest, unless he wants to get seriously injured or even killed.

We have the judiciary to sort out the details.

---

Who are you complying with? We are now seeing "fake" ICE, people who are wearing military gear and harassing people on the street because ICE is not identifying themselves.

This is a sad time in our history. There's a video of a handcuffed female detainee being taken into a portapotty by an ICE agent while his partner stays in the car.

And none of this is remotely effective.

---

Oh no! Well I guess we can't enforce immigration laws anymore. Darn it.

---

Don't be obtuse. What other law do we enforce by grabbing random people and forcing them to prove their innocence?

Maybe we should militarize the IRS and have them grave citizens in Highland Park and force them to show their tax returns or set up road blocks to make sure everyone has a license.

Mr. Chung, it's not happening to you, so it's ok?

---

By masked agents? If being asked to prove your innocence you should have the right to see your accuser. This is South American death squad stuff, not US Federal Agents.

2 years ago there was out cry on this Board about the tacticalization of the Federal Government and law enforcement, not to mention the weaponization of Agencies. Now under Trump it is not only ok, but growing.

---

Are you comparing ICE going after foreign invaders to the FBI going after Jan 6ers?

One group came here to loot and pillage, the other group came to stop their own government from stealing an election.

---

I am talking stopping people on the steet in daylight. These are not DEA tactical raids breaking into a house to get them. It is in the middle of the street with civilians around. Tactical Used to be for a specific operation, this is day to day. One of those guys could stip me or you,we have no recourse. We will be zip tied and thrown in the system having to prove innocence to masked gunman. All they need is for that AEGIS illegal radar to be turned on us. Get it, there is no accountability. No info on how many were legal. What evidence to go after them. That matters.
.

---

If a masked ICE agent stopped you, hogtied you, and tossed you into a detention center, are you saying you have no recourse because he was masked? But if he had no mask, you would have recourse?

ICE is operating without any paperwork - none? ICE has no records of which of its agents are on any given assignment? ICE has no idea who is working for it because its agents wear masks?

Get real.

Biden let in 12 million thugs and helpful white liberals are hunting down ICE agents - damn right they need to wear masks.

---