It's not clear, but we'll assume there was some contact as he stepped away. He could have done the same without aiming or firing, and probably more quickly.
Liberals know she accelerated into the man, they just don't care
9,448 Views |
303 Replies |
Last: 1 day ago by whiterock
BUDOS said:
"To LWNJs, civil liberties are a speed bump to their authoritarian dreams."
Harrison, just to clarify, are you saying that Trump has not and does not exhibit authoritarian behavior?
That's the lazy question.
The real question is what unique authoritarian behavior has he demonstrated that no other US president has?
(that is why that question will cause you to disappear for a week until everyone forgets you ignored it)
BUDOS said:
Would not how one interprets the context of how a situation is presented depends on upon one's belief system? If one has a liberal or conservative belief system, would that not affect how they accept the information as true or false or at least questionable, if the context creates dissonance?
Nice word salad, but I already had some salmon. Anyway, context is properly driven by facts, not a media narrative.
ICE was there properly, the woman interfered and her actions caused everything that happened in consequence.
The rest is emotional noise.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Sam Lowry said:historian said:
Yes they do. That is why ICE exists: to enforce immigration laws. What do you think ICE stands for?
I don't think it stands for "Arrest and Deport Without a Warrant."
You obviously skipped class on INA Day. ICE doesn't need a warrant to arrest an illegal alien for being here illegally.
BUDOS said:
Would not how one interprets the context of how a situation is presented depends on upon one's belief system? If one has a liberal or conservative belief system, would that not affect how they accept the information as true or false or at least questionable, if the context creates dissonance?
No. And the evidence is there that disproves your post.
Sam Lowry said:
It's not clear, but we'll assume there was some contact as he stepped away. He could have done the same without aiming or firing, and probably more quickly.
he didn't step out of the way. he was knocked out of the way hard enough to cause internal bleeding.
whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:historian said:
Yes they do. That is why ICE exists: to enforce immigration laws. What do you think ICE stands for?
I don't think it stands for "Arrest and Deport Without a Warrant."
You obviously skipped class on INA Day. ICE doesn't need a warrant to arrest an illegal alien for being here illegally.
FLBear5630 said:cowboycwr said:
Still no comments at all from those opposing ice about the violence from the left.
Just silence.
People being attacked.
Churches invaded.
And yet silence from the crowd worried about civil liberties, justice, due process, etc.
Arrest them. No Issues here. Break the law, arrest them. Arrest and let Judge and Jury do their thing. Shoot them, no.
And what if they attack the arresting officers? Can they use force back?
Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:historian said:
Yes they do. That is why ICE exists: to enforce immigration laws. What do you think ICE stands for?
I don't think it stands for "Arrest and Deport Without a Warrant."
You obviously skipped class on INA Day. ICE doesn't need a warrant to arrest an illegal alien for being here illegally.
LOL no, they don't. Never have. Illegals have due process rights if/when they are arrested on charges of breaking other laws, but not immigration law.
Dude. I've watched ICE round up illegals with a helicopter...like cattle. Actually, it was a USCG helicopter. I had the whole thing on my iPhone and lost it in an update. They didn't have a warrant. A group got spotted. ICE went and rounded up. My canine commander buddy doesn't need a warrant to go chase them thru the brush. The ground sensors in his area go off, he's out the door for the chase. It's no different anywhere else in the country. At the checkpoints. North of the checkpoints. Whether they get caught in the brush on the south side of Hwy 285 between Falfurrias & Hebbronville, or they get caught on the south side 285th St in Chicago, no warrant required. They go to detention, then a deportation hearing, then home. No warrant anywhere in the process.
Why do you work so hard to be so ignorant?
whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:historian said:
Yes they do. That is why ICE exists: to enforce immigration laws. What do you think ICE stands for?
I don't think it stands for "Arrest and Deport Without a Warrant."
You obviously skipped class on INA Day. ICE doesn't need a warrant to arrest an illegal alien for being here illegally.
LOL no, they don't. Never have. Illegals have due process rights if/when they are arrested on charges of breaking other laws, but not immigration law.
Dude. I've watched ICE round up illegals with a helicopter...like cattle. Actually, it was a USCG helicopter. I had the whole thing on my iPhone and lost it in an update. They didn't have a warrant. A group got spotted. ICE went and rounded up. My canine commander buddy doesn't need a warrant to go chase them thru the brush. The ground sensors in his area go off, he's out the door for the chase. It's no different anywhere else in the country. At the checkpoints. North of the checkpoints. Whether they get caught in the brush on the south side of Hwy 285 between Falfurrias & Hebbronville, or they get caught on the south side 285th St in Chicago, no warrant required. They go to detention, then a deportation hearing, then home. No warrant anywhere in the process.
Why do you work so hard to be so ignorant?
That's cute. I assume you're just trolling, for whatever reason. The requirements are obviously different in different zones and different circumstances.
EatMoreSalmon said:FLBear5630 said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:FLBear5630 said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:FLBear5630 said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:FLBear5630 said:Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:GrowlTowel said:FLBear5630 said:Wangchung said:FLBear5630 said:Wangchung said:FLBear5630 said:Realitybites said:
Look, any single one of us who was serious about exercising all their constitutional rights would have opened fire on that driver if we were put in that situation. The fact that he was an ICE agent is incidental to the matter.
But the reality is that a lesbian Karen casualty isn't enough to get BLM to burn down Minneapolis a second time in January.
Look for the left to produce more such incidents as the weather improves.
Why hasn't Pam Blondi been rolling up Antifa cells?
You would have opened fire? Rather than stepping out of the way as he is trained to do. That is the training and guidelines, not to put yourself in front of a vehicle and to move out of the way of moving vehicles.
You guys are frigging nuts, you de-escalate. These are law enforcement agents. Their job is NOT to kill people but to protect people from being killed.
Was she wrong? Yeah. Could she have been arrested, sure. Did she deserve to die?
What is your expectation for law enforcement? To shoot or to try and avoid shooting?
Please, I beg you, I dare you, whatever it takes, please tell me how YOU would de-escalate those two dykes with the whistles who were repeatedly and intentionally blocking the ICE vehicles after finding them through ICEWatch. Show us what you got. This is your chance to shine.
Have you watched it? Or read the minute-by-minute timeline? She was trying to leave. She is seen waving a car in front of here and then reverses, turns her wheel away from the Officer and moves forward. The Officer shoots 1 shot through the windshield and the car goes forward, and he shoots 3 times more. The car crashes. He was struck AFTER he fired a round through the windshield, not before.
This was an ICE officer, not a police officer. Let the law enforcement people that are trained to deal with civilian unrest deal with it. That is what they do. ICE serve Administrative warrants. Get the license and pick her up at home if she said something that bad.
As for de-escalating, one thing for sure shooting 4 times into a moving vehicle from close range ain't it...
Watch the video and read the timeline.
So you're going with lying about what we plainly see on the many videos? And you of course have NO methods of de-escalation to suggest, just your fantasy that the two activists that had been harassing and blocking ICE vehicles all day were suddenly just trying to leave. Despite the car being in park across the road while her wife walked around and filmed. Face it, at this point you're just trolling.
You are on the side of a big, Federalized Government that can shoot people without any investigation or questioning. The Government is right, the individual is wrong. Got it.
Wait, when did that happen?
We don't need no stinking investigation when Federal Officers shoot someone dead....
They are in fact investigating this shooting
One of the reasons that you are so mad might be that you often make things up in your head…when the facts in the real world are quite different
Yes, I know I posted it. I said that it what drives me nuts about this Administration. If they just say what they are doing and quit with the posturing and saying they don't have to it would help them tremendously.
This is the second time, Hegswith with the boat blowing up he escalated it for no reason. The SEAL Admiral professionally answered the questions and everything calmed down. Now, Noem. All she had to do was make this statement after the incident and the whole thing calms down.
From the get go they said it was their view this was a justified shooting and that they were investigating it
Maybe it's others trying to inflame things and stoke a response
It is a combination for sure. Others stoke it and they hit the lure like a bass every time.
Lol, spoken by the one that hits the lure every time
You can say with a straight face she deserved to be shot That ICE is handling this well?
No, why would I say that? Deserved is not the right word.
Exactly.
We had a US citizen shot 4 times from 2 locations for protesting.
Read the timeline. The car strick the Officer AFTER he fired through front windshield. Did she lose control after being hit? She pulled over to let her passenger out to video the arrest. It looks like she was pulling out and jad to wait for a car to pass. Read it.
Do you want masked Federal agents being able to shoot you with the assumption you are wrong, prove otherwise after you were shot?
Could she be arrested? Sure. Should she have been? Sure, if the officer was impeded. Four shots, one through the windshield and 3 through the side window?
Someone said how do you de-escalate. How about telling her to move the car? Happens hundreds of times a day.
Read the timeline. There are several. GMA has a write up down to the seconds based on video from HSA. GMA is not conservative so take that into account too.
Shooting should be last resort. This is not Fallujah.
You believe that he shot the lady while the car was sitting there? That's what you think happened?
I'm not saying you are definitely wrong, I just don't believe that at this point.
Read the timeline, there is definitely some ambiguity. Take it for what it is worth. Does not seem skewed and is very time specific. Could it be? Sure, but it puts out a detailed timeline and HSA has not put out a timeline that contradicts this.
Points that caused me to have doubts.
First - she pulled diagonally and her partner got out to talk and video to officer.
Second- A car was passing, detailed enough to ID CA plates. She waved them by.
Third - Wheels were turned away from officer. She was reversing
Fourth - Officer was to front and left, not in front and shot through front windshield then vehicle went forward.
Was she agitating? Probably. Was she being polite? Probably not. Was her intent to disrupt? Definetley.
Was her intent to use her vehicle as a weapon? Those three points say no to me. You don't stop and leave your partner with the Police if your intent is to run them over. You don't wave by traffic with your wheels turned away. It looks like she dropped her off and was trying to get out of there and it went wrong.
OR at least need an investigation and a determination by third party, which is why I thought IG. There is too much conflicting info for anyone to know. And shooting someone to death is not a light act.
That is why I think the echo chamber is causing more harm that good. AND to keep claiming Officer safety blurs the lines of what happened.
We probably won't agree. But, at least both sides of the information is out there to make your own decision. Not just go with the Officer Safety and anyone that questions a fatal shooting is pro-criminal.
Minneapolis ICE shooting: A minute-by-minute timeline of how Renee Nicole Good died - Good Morning America
That's a timeline by ABC news that is in no way definitive or official. It cannot be interpreted to be saying the agent fired before he is getting hit. It becomes suspect in leaving out the content of the conversations between participants at the scene.
Continuing to opine someone could just step out of the way of the vehicle while on an icy road isn't logical. My own opinion is that Good did not account for slippage in her driving as she tried to flee the scene and avoid arrest.
Yep, that's the problem with Florida, he's arguing and effectively accusing the officer of shooting first, while the rest of us saw the officer's own video of him getting hit before any shot was the fired.
I know it could be edited, but just seems odd to think he shot a lady while she hadn't or wasn't accelerating into him.
He's TDS and pro illegals roaming free, so I think we see his bias. The rest of us actually care about our communities long term and want legal residents only.
And then there's Sam who just outright lies about the officer even being hit.
Clowning.
Harrison, your response was " That's the lazy question.
The real question is what unique authoritarian behavior has he demonstrated that no other US president has?
(that is why that question will cause you to disappear for a week until everyone forgets you ignored it)"
You answered my question, so I don't normally see any need to respond to your effort to deflect and nonanswer. However in this case it is too easy to pass up. His involvement in the January 6th event.
The real question is what unique authoritarian behavior has he demonstrated that no other US president has?
(that is why that question will cause you to disappear for a week until everyone forgets you ignored it)"
You answered my question, so I don't normally see any need to respond to your effort to deflect and nonanswer. However in this case it is too easy to pass up. His involvement in the January 6th event.
I'm pretty sure understood the question; however, your response didn't seem to directly relate to my question. I was not referring to any specific instance.
Tinny, let's have a game. can you create. a sentence with the word left or Dems. The world ain't that simple little fella
TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:EatMoreSalmon said:FLBear5630 said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:FLBear5630 said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:FLBear5630 said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:FLBear5630 said:Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:GrowlTowel said:FLBear5630 said:Wangchung said:FLBear5630 said:Wangchung said:FLBear5630 said:Realitybites said:
Look, any single one of us who was serious about exercising all their constitutional rights would have opened fire on that driver if we were put in that situation. The fact that he was an ICE agent is incidental to the matter.
But the reality is that a lesbian Karen casualty isn't enough to get BLM to burn down Minneapolis a second time in January.
Look for the left to produce more such incidents as the weather improves.
Why hasn't Pam Blondi been rolling up Antifa cells?
You would have opened fire? Rather than stepping out of the way as he is trained to do. That is the training and guidelines, not to put yourself in front of a vehicle and to move out of the way of moving vehicles.
You guys are frigging nuts, you de-escalate. These are law enforcement agents. Their job is NOT to kill people but to protect people from being killed.
Was she wrong? Yeah. Could she have been arrested, sure. Did she deserve to die?
What is your expectation for law enforcement? To shoot or to try and avoid shooting?
Please, I beg you, I dare you, whatever it takes, please tell me how YOU would de-escalate those two dykes with the whistles who were repeatedly and intentionally blocking the ICE vehicles after finding them through ICEWatch. Show us what you got. This is your chance to shine.
Have you watched it? Or read the minute-by-minute timeline? She was trying to leave. She is seen waving a car in front of here and then reverses, turns her wheel away from the Officer and moves forward. The Officer shoots 1 shot through the windshield and the car goes forward, and he shoots 3 times more. The car crashes. He was struck AFTER he fired a round through the windshield, not before.
This was an ICE officer, not a police officer. Let the law enforcement people that are trained to deal with civilian unrest deal with it. That is what they do. ICE serve Administrative warrants. Get the license and pick her up at home if she said something that bad.
As for de-escalating, one thing for sure shooting 4 times into a moving vehicle from close range ain't it...
Watch the video and read the timeline.
So you're going with lying about what we plainly see on the many videos? And you of course have NO methods of de-escalation to suggest, just your fantasy that the two activists that had been harassing and blocking ICE vehicles all day were suddenly just trying to leave. Despite the car being in park across the road while her wife walked around and filmed. Face it, at this point you're just trolling.
You are on the side of a big, Federalized Government that can shoot people without any investigation or questioning. The Government is right, the individual is wrong. Got it.
Wait, when did that happen?
We don't need no stinking investigation when Federal Officers shoot someone dead....
They are in fact investigating this shooting
One of the reasons that you are so mad might be that you often make things up in your head…when the facts in the real world are quite different
Yes, I know I posted it. I said that it what drives me nuts about this Administration. If they just say what they are doing and quit with the posturing and saying they don't have to it would help them tremendously.
This is the second time, Hegswith with the boat blowing up he escalated it for no reason. The SEAL Admiral professionally answered the questions and everything calmed down. Now, Noem. All she had to do was make this statement after the incident and the whole thing calms down.
From the get go they said it was their view this was a justified shooting and that they were investigating it
Maybe it's others trying to inflame things and stoke a response
It is a combination for sure. Others stoke it and they hit the lure like a bass every time.
Lol, spoken by the one that hits the lure every time
You can say with a straight face she deserved to be shot That ICE is handling this well?
No, why would I say that? Deserved is not the right word.
Exactly.
We had a US citizen shot 4 times from 2 locations for protesting.
Read the timeline. The car strick the Officer AFTER he fired through front windshield. Did she lose control after being hit? She pulled over to let her passenger out to video the arrest. It looks like she was pulling out and jad to wait for a car to pass. Read it.
Do you want masked Federal agents being able to shoot you with the assumption you are wrong, prove otherwise after you were shot?
Could she be arrested? Sure. Should she have been? Sure, if the officer was impeded. Four shots, one through the windshield and 3 through the side window?
Someone said how do you de-escalate. How about telling her to move the car? Happens hundreds of times a day.
Read the timeline. There are several. GMA has a write up down to the seconds based on video from HSA. GMA is not conservative so take that into account too.
Shooting should be last resort. This is not Fallujah.
You believe that he shot the lady while the car was sitting there? That's what you think happened?
I'm not saying you are definitely wrong, I just don't believe that at this point.
Read the timeline, there is definitely some ambiguity. Take it for what it is worth. Does not seem skewed and is very time specific. Could it be? Sure, but it puts out a detailed timeline and HSA has not put out a timeline that contradicts this.
Points that caused me to have doubts.
First - she pulled diagonally and her partner got out to talk and video to officer.
Second- A car was passing, detailed enough to ID CA plates. She waved them by.
Third - Wheels were turned away from officer. She was reversing
Fourth - Officer was to front and left, not in front and shot through front windshield then vehicle went forward.
Was she agitating? Probably. Was she being polite? Probably not. Was her intent to disrupt? Definetley.
Was her intent to use her vehicle as a weapon? Those three points say no to me. You don't stop and leave your partner with the Police if your intent is to run them over. You don't wave by traffic with your wheels turned away. It looks like she dropped her off and was trying to get out of there and it went wrong.
OR at least need an investigation and a determination by third party, which is why I thought IG. There is too much conflicting info for anyone to know. And shooting someone to death is not a light act.
That is why I think the echo chamber is causing more harm that good. AND to keep claiming Officer safety blurs the lines of what happened.
We probably won't agree. But, at least both sides of the information is out there to make your own decision. Not just go with the Officer Safety and anyone that questions a fatal shooting is pro-criminal.
Minneapolis ICE shooting: A minute-by-minute timeline of how Renee Nicole Good died - Good Morning America
That's a timeline by ABC news that is in no way definitive or official. It cannot be interpreted to be saying the agent fired before he is getting hit. It becomes suspect in leaving out the content of the conversations between participants at the scene.
Continuing to opine someone could just step out of the way of the vehicle while on an icy road isn't logical. My own opinion is that Good did not account for slippage in her driving as she tried to flee the scene and avoid arrest.
And then there's Sam who just outright lies about the officer even being hit.
Clowning.
No idea what you're talking about there.
If anyone has a video clearly showing whether he was hit and whether it was before or after the first shot, I would sure like to see it. Whatever's playing in your own head doesn't count.
J.R. said:
Tinny, let's have a game. can you create. a sentence with the word left or Dems. The world ain't that simple little fella
How about JR leans Left because he has a thang for that new logo, a D in a big hole. Yep, boy, dem are those apples
BUDOS said:
Harrison, your response was " That's the lazy question.
The real question is what unique authoritarian behavior has he demonstrated that no other US president has?
(that is why that question will cause you to disappear for a week until everyone forgets you ignored it)"
You answered my question, so I don't normally see any need to respond to your effort to deflect and nonanswer. However in this case it is too easy to pass up. His involvement in the January 6th event.
See you in a week.
EatMoreSalmon said:FLBear5630 said:Oldbear83 said:
Amazing the kinds of posts people leave when they completely abandon context.
Yeah, stepping out if the way is just so unreasonable...
You ever get out of Florida in the winter?
Grew up in NY and lived in Wisconsin for 8 years. Your comment about NOT being able to step out of the way in snow conditions shows not having experience in those conditions. That Officer was more mobile than the vehicle in snow and ice conditions. Conditions apply to both in the street, either they both had no mobility, in which case the Officer had better mobility. OR, they both had good traction, in which the Officer had more options and better mobility. He had to work at getting hit. He had to move in the way of the vehicle breaking numerous law enforcement rules.
This will all come out in the law suits coming, I am sure. IF they do not prosecute the guy for putting 4 rounds in the lady there will be civil cases for wrongful death. This is going to play out. The tactics used are going to become the poster child for how NOT to handle a situation. Let's give it time. Not much more to be said.
Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:historian said:
Yes they do. That is why ICE exists: to enforce immigration laws. What do you think ICE stands for?
I don't think it stands for "Arrest and Deport Without a Warrant."
You obviously skipped class on INA Day. ICE doesn't need a warrant to arrest an illegal alien for being here illegally.
LOL no, they don't. Never have. Illegals have due process rights if/when they are arrested on charges of breaking other laws, but not immigration law.
Dude. I've watched ICE round up illegals with a helicopter...like cattle. Actually, it was a USCG helicopter. I had the whole thing on my iPhone and lost it in an update. They didn't have a warrant. A group got spotted. ICE went and rounded up. My canine commander buddy doesn't need a warrant to go chase them thru the brush. The ground sensors in his area go off, he's out the door for the chase. It's no different anywhere else in the country. At the checkpoints. North of the checkpoints. Whether they get caught in the brush on the south side of Hwy 285 between Falfurrias & Hebbronville, or they get caught on the south side 285th St in Chicago, no warrant required. They go to detention, then a deportation hearing, then home. No warrant anywhere in the process.
Why do you work so hard to be so ignorant?
That's cute. I assume you're just trolling, for whatever reason. The requirements are obviously different in different zones and different circumstances.
That's cute. ICE operates on administrative authority.....immigration judges are Executive Branch employees. It does not need a judicial court order to arrest an illegal alien anywhere in the country. The only restriction is that ICE does need a judicial court order (search warrant) to enter a private home or business without permission (outside of the 100mi enforcement zone). But the arrest itself is done solely on administrative authority.
whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:historian said:
Yes they do. That is why ICE exists: to enforce immigration laws. What do you think ICE stands for?
I don't think it stands for "Arrest and Deport Without a Warrant."
You obviously skipped class on INA Day. ICE doesn't need a warrant to arrest an illegal alien for being here illegally.
LOL no, they don't. Never have. Illegals have due process rights if/when they are arrested on charges of breaking other laws, but not immigration law.
Dude. I've watched ICE round up illegals with a helicopter...like cattle. Actually, it was a USCG helicopter. I had the whole thing on my iPhone and lost it in an update. They didn't have a warrant. A group got spotted. ICE went and rounded up. My canine commander buddy doesn't need a warrant to go chase them thru the brush. The ground sensors in his area go off, he's out the door for the chase. It's no different anywhere else in the country. At the checkpoints. North of the checkpoints. Whether they get caught in the brush on the south side of Hwy 285 between Falfurrias & Hebbronville, or they get caught on the south side 285th St in Chicago, no warrant required. They go to detention, then a deportation hearing, then home. No warrant anywhere in the process.
Why do you work so hard to be so ignorant?
That's cute. I assume you're just trolling, for whatever reason. The requirements are obviously different in different zones and different circumstances.
That's cute. ICE operates on administrative authority.....immigration judges are Executive Branch employees. It does not need a judicial court order to arrest an illegal alien anywhere in the country. The only restriction is that ICE does need a judicial court order (search warrant) to enter a private home or business without permission (outside of the 100mi enforcement zone). But the arrest itself is done solely on administrative authority.
True, but how do the handle people with criminals? They work with law enforcement, you do not see ICE go alone for anything but strict immigration. If locals don't cooperate, they use US Marshals. You keep mixing the two. For criminal, they need a Judicial Warrant, Admin is not enough.
Grew up in New York and Wisconsin. That explains so much. No wonder he ignored facts and lies like Sam.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:historian said:
Yes they do. That is why ICE exists: to enforce immigration laws. What do you think ICE stands for?
I don't think it stands for "Arrest and Deport Without a Warrant."
You obviously skipped class on INA Day. ICE doesn't need a warrant to arrest an illegal alien for being here illegally.
LOL no, they don't. Never have. Illegals have due process rights if/when they are arrested on charges of breaking other laws, but not immigration law.
Dude. I've watched ICE round up illegals with a helicopter...like cattle. Actually, it was a USCG helicopter. I had the whole thing on my iPhone and lost it in an update. They didn't have a warrant. A group got spotted. ICE went and rounded up. My canine commander buddy doesn't need a warrant to go chase them thru the brush. The ground sensors in his area go off, he's out the door for the chase. It's no different anywhere else in the country. At the checkpoints. North of the checkpoints. Whether they get caught in the brush on the south side of Hwy 285 between Falfurrias & Hebbronville, or they get caught on the south side 285th St in Chicago, no warrant required. They go to detention, then a deportation hearing, then home. No warrant anywhere in the process.
Why do you work so hard to be so ignorant?
That's cute. I assume you're just trolling, for whatever reason. The requirements are obviously different in different zones and different circumstances.
That's cute. ICE operates on administrative authority.....immigration judges are Executive Branch employees. It does not need a judicial court order to arrest an illegal alien anywhere in the country. The only restriction is that ICE does need a judicial court order (search warrant) to enter a private home or business without permission (outside of the 100mi enforcement zone). But the arrest itself is done solely on administrative authority.
Who said anything about judicial warrants? You're partly wrong about them too, though. They are needed to enter a home or the private area of a business even in the 100-mile zone. Of course the system is routinely abused; if that's your point I don't disagree.
Sam Lowry said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:EatMoreSalmon said:FLBear5630 said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:FLBear5630 said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:FLBear5630 said:TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:FLBear5630 said:Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:GrowlTowel said:FLBear5630 said:Wangchung said:FLBear5630 said:Wangchung said:FLBear5630 said:Realitybites said:
Look, any single one of us who was serious about exercising all their constitutional rights would have opened fire on that driver if we were put in that situation. The fact that he was an ICE agent is incidental to the matter.
But the reality is that a lesbian Karen casualty isn't enough to get BLM to burn down Minneapolis a second time in January.
Look for the left to produce more such incidents as the weather improves.
Why hasn't Pam Blondi been rolling up Antifa cells?
You would have opened fire? Rather than stepping out of the way as he is trained to do. That is the training and guidelines, not to put yourself in front of a vehicle and to move out of the way of moving vehicles.
You guys are frigging nuts, you de-escalate. These are law enforcement agents. Their job is NOT to kill people but to protect people from being killed.
Was she wrong? Yeah. Could she have been arrested, sure. Did she deserve to die?
What is your expectation for law enforcement? To shoot or to try and avoid shooting?
Please, I beg you, I dare you, whatever it takes, please tell me how YOU would de-escalate those two dykes with the whistles who were repeatedly and intentionally blocking the ICE vehicles after finding them through ICEWatch. Show us what you got. This is your chance to shine.
Have you watched it? Or read the minute-by-minute timeline? She was trying to leave. She is seen waving a car in front of here and then reverses, turns her wheel away from the Officer and moves forward. The Officer shoots 1 shot through the windshield and the car goes forward, and he shoots 3 times more. The car crashes. He was struck AFTER he fired a round through the windshield, not before.
This was an ICE officer, not a police officer. Let the law enforcement people that are trained to deal with civilian unrest deal with it. That is what they do. ICE serve Administrative warrants. Get the license and pick her up at home if she said something that bad.
As for de-escalating, one thing for sure shooting 4 times into a moving vehicle from close range ain't it...
Watch the video and read the timeline.
So you're going with lying about what we plainly see on the many videos? And you of course have NO methods of de-escalation to suggest, just your fantasy that the two activists that had been harassing and blocking ICE vehicles all day were suddenly just trying to leave. Despite the car being in park across the road while her wife walked around and filmed. Face it, at this point you're just trolling.
You are on the side of a big, Federalized Government that can shoot people without any investigation or questioning. The Government is right, the individual is wrong. Got it.
Wait, when did that happen?
We don't need no stinking investigation when Federal Officers shoot someone dead....
They are in fact investigating this shooting
One of the reasons that you are so mad might be that you often make things up in your head…when the facts in the real world are quite different
Yes, I know I posted it. I said that it what drives me nuts about this Administration. If they just say what they are doing and quit with the posturing and saying they don't have to it would help them tremendously.
This is the second time, Hegswith with the boat blowing up he escalated it for no reason. The SEAL Admiral professionally answered the questions and everything calmed down. Now, Noem. All she had to do was make this statement after the incident and the whole thing calms down.
From the get go they said it was their view this was a justified shooting and that they were investigating it
Maybe it's others trying to inflame things and stoke a response
It is a combination for sure. Others stoke it and they hit the lure like a bass every time.
Lol, spoken by the one that hits the lure every time
You can say with a straight face she deserved to be shot That ICE is handling this well?
No, why would I say that? Deserved is not the right word.
Exactly.
We had a US citizen shot 4 times from 2 locations for protesting.
Read the timeline. The car strick the Officer AFTER he fired through front windshield. Did she lose control after being hit? She pulled over to let her passenger out to video the arrest. It looks like she was pulling out and jad to wait for a car to pass. Read it.
Do you want masked Federal agents being able to shoot you with the assumption you are wrong, prove otherwise after you were shot?
Could she be arrested? Sure. Should she have been? Sure, if the officer was impeded. Four shots, one through the windshield and 3 through the side window?
Someone said how do you de-escalate. How about telling her to move the car? Happens hundreds of times a day.
Read the timeline. There are several. GMA has a write up down to the seconds based on video from HSA. GMA is not conservative so take that into account too.
Shooting should be last resort. This is not Fallujah.
You believe that he shot the lady while the car was sitting there? That's what you think happened?
I'm not saying you are definitely wrong, I just don't believe that at this point.
Read the timeline, there is definitely some ambiguity. Take it for what it is worth. Does not seem skewed and is very time specific. Could it be? Sure, but it puts out a detailed timeline and HSA has not put out a timeline that contradicts this.
Points that caused me to have doubts.
First - she pulled diagonally and her partner got out to talk and video to officer.
Second- A car was passing, detailed enough to ID CA plates. She waved them by.
Third - Wheels were turned away from officer. She was reversing
Fourth - Officer was to front and left, not in front and shot through front windshield then vehicle went forward.
Was she agitating? Probably. Was she being polite? Probably not. Was her intent to disrupt? Definetley.
Was her intent to use her vehicle as a weapon? Those three points say no to me. You don't stop and leave your partner with the Police if your intent is to run them over. You don't wave by traffic with your wheels turned away. It looks like she dropped her off and was trying to get out of there and it went wrong.
OR at least need an investigation and a determination by third party, which is why I thought IG. There is too much conflicting info for anyone to know. And shooting someone to death is not a light act.
That is why I think the echo chamber is causing more harm that good. AND to keep claiming Officer safety blurs the lines of what happened.
We probably won't agree. But, at least both sides of the information is out there to make your own decision. Not just go with the Officer Safety and anyone that questions a fatal shooting is pro-criminal.
Minneapolis ICE shooting: A minute-by-minute timeline of how Renee Nicole Good died - Good Morning America
That's a timeline by ABC news that is in no way definitive or official. It cannot be interpreted to be saying the agent fired before he is getting hit. It becomes suspect in leaving out the content of the conversations between participants at the scene.
Continuing to opine someone could just step out of the way of the vehicle while on an icy road isn't logical. My own opinion is that Good did not account for slippage in her driving as she tried to flee the scene and avoid arrest.
And then there's Sam who just outright lies about the officer even being hit.
Clowning.
No idea what you're talking about there.
If anyone has a video clearly showing whether he was hit and whether it was before or after the first shot, I would sure like to see it. Whatever's playing in your own head doesn't count.
They are all over this thread and the other one.
FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:whiterock said:Sam Lowry said:historian said:
Yes they do. That is why ICE exists: to enforce immigration laws. What do you think ICE stands for?
I don't think it stands for "Arrest and Deport Without a Warrant."
You obviously skipped class on INA Day. ICE doesn't need a warrant to arrest an illegal alien for being here illegally.
LOL no, they don't. Never have. Illegals have due process rights if/when they are arrested on charges of breaking other laws, but not immigration law.
Dude. I've watched ICE round up illegals with a helicopter...like cattle. Actually, it was a USCG helicopter. I had the whole thing on my iPhone and lost it in an update. They didn't have a warrant. A group got spotted. ICE went and rounded up. My canine commander buddy doesn't need a warrant to go chase them thru the brush. The ground sensors in his area go off, he's out the door for the chase. It's no different anywhere else in the country. At the checkpoints. North of the checkpoints. Whether they get caught in the brush on the south side of Hwy 285 between Falfurrias & Hebbronville, or they get caught on the south side 285th St in Chicago, no warrant required. They go to detention, then a deportation hearing, then home. No warrant anywhere in the process.
Why do you work so hard to be so ignorant?
That's cute. I assume you're just trolling, for whatever reason. The requirements are obviously different in different zones and different circumstances.
That's cute. ICE operates on administrative authority.....immigration judges are Executive Branch employees. It does not need a judicial court order to arrest an illegal alien anywhere in the country. The only restriction is that ICE does need a judicial court order (search warrant) to enter a private home or business without permission (outside of the 100mi enforcement zone). But the arrest itself is done solely on administrative authority.
True, but how do the handle people with criminals? They work with law enforcement, you do not see ICE go alone for anything but strict immigration. If locals don't cooperate, they use US Marshals. You keep mixing the two. For criminal, they need a Judicial Warrant, Admin is not enough.
no, you are mixing the two.
ICE has authority to arrest illegal aliens, whether they have broken other laws or not, and deport them. Whether to deport or criminally prosecute a detainee is a prosecutorial decision by DOJ. If after the illegal has been detained DOJ decides to prosecute & incarcerate rather than deport, then ICE will hand the case over to other agencies.
Generally speaking, we would rather deport than prosecute, in order to save the costs of prosecution and incarceration. But that presumes your border actually is a barrier to illegal entry, which has not been the case except for the Trump ear. And of course there are going to be some cases where public interest is better served by prosecution rather than deportation.