Problem is the ones who grow up, and or are raised, to steal from others, hurt others, step on their rights, it’s easier to correct early, than let it fester into something that’s going to require much more blood.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Video of the shooting of our girl in DC
- Thread starter Steel head
- Start date
Problem is the ones who grow up, and or are raised, to steal from others, hurt others, step on their rights, it’s easier to correct early, than let it fester into something that’s going to require much more blood.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. You breached a federal building with VIP's guarded by an obvious Clown Shoes organization. But after watching a years worth of looting, destruction and assaults the last thing I thought would be the price for trespass and vandalism was lethal force against an unarmed woman.
There's a time to call Alamo, but when you have significant space to retreat, a physical advantage at the ingress point, a breacher with no weapons and TAC officers on the same side as the person breaching the barrier it's not time to take that shot.
The shooter was poorly trained, made a bad decision and should be removed from the force. I've watched guys and command chains get sent home for less.
There's a time to call Alamo, but when you have significant space to retreat, a physical advantage at the ingress point, a breacher with no weapons and TAC officers on the same side as the person breaching the barrier it's not time to take that shot.
The shooter was poorly trained, made a bad decision and should be removed from the force. I've watched guys and command chains get sent home for less.
The rule is deadly force is not authorized to protect capital property
They will argue threat to life and limb. Which is bullshit. You can plainly see there is no eminent threat to anyone. This ain't a dark alley where you can't see hands or some dimly lit mud hit in AFG. It's well lit with clear lines of sight, a very good ability to assess the threat, other heavily armed resources at the breach point and ample space to retreat and reassess.
Edited to add: it's also not accidental they are trying to frame this as an "insurrection".
Further edit: and the shooters SA is worse than I thought. There is also another SO sauntering down the hall in the background like he's going for a bag of donuts. He's in plain view of the barrier and not on guns based on what I can see. So why is Mr Amped Up Shooter putting a round in a 100 pound unarmed woman when, if Mr Donut Walker moved a little faster, he probably would have pushed her backwards on her ass and into the TAC Team? I have many questions.
Edited to add: it's also not accidental they are trying to frame this as an "insurrection".
Further edit: and the shooters SA is worse than I thought. There is also another SO sauntering down the hall in the background like he's going for a bag of donuts. He's in plain view of the barrier and not on guns based on what I can see. So why is Mr Amped Up Shooter putting a round in a 100 pound unarmed woman when, if Mr Donut Walker moved a little faster, he probably would have pushed her backwards on her ass and into the TAC Team? I have many questions.
Last edited:
I cant understand her being shot .
The Officers behind and around her I would have thought would have done something first.
Prayers for Her and her family!
The Officers behind and around her I would have thought would have done something first.
Prayers for Her and her family!
Tragedy ...yes
Accident/poor decision making by shooter ...yes
Poor decision by woman trying to breach ...yes
play grown up games and it’s possible to win grown up prizes
guy will go to trial and be judged
it’s really not more difficult than that
Accident/poor decision making by shooter ...yes
Poor decision by woman trying to breach ...yes
play grown up games and it’s possible to win grown up prizes
guy will go to trial and be judged
it’s really not more difficult than that
Also, here is a POV from the LE side. I’m only going to post this and not get into arguments as it’s just another POV for people to consider:
You are protecting the entirety of Congress and the VP. Literally 2nd and 3rd in the order of succession are in this building.
What is at the moment a mob (call it what you want) has breached and entered the building.
You have retreated into an area with two routes of egress and the mob is at both routes. You are effectively surrounded.
You barricade both routes of egress and set up choke points to protect yourself and the others.
The mob sees the doors are barricaded and proceeds to work on breaking into both points of egress.
They have breeched the building and are still attempting to get into the area you have retreated to and barricaded yourself in for protection.
Now you see them trying to get a person (the female victim) into a broken window. A reasonable person would assume anyone who gets in will attempt to open the barricaded doors and let the 10’s or hundreds people in.
So, you have two choices:
Accept their intentions could very well be violent (probable cause is needed for deadly force), and use the choke point to your advantage by shooting anyone who breaches or is close to breaching the doors.
or
Hope and take the chance the are just protestors that just want to talk once they break in
You are protecting the entirety of Congress and the VP. Literally 2nd and 3rd in the order of succession are in this building.
What is at the moment a mob (call it what you want) has breached and entered the building.
You have retreated into an area with two routes of egress and the mob is at both routes. You are effectively surrounded.
You barricade both routes of egress and set up choke points to protect yourself and the others.
The mob sees the doors are barricaded and proceeds to work on breaking into both points of egress.
They have breeched the building and are still attempting to get into the area you have retreated to and barricaded yourself in for protection.
Now you see them trying to get a person (the female victim) into a broken window. A reasonable person would assume anyone who gets in will attempt to open the barricaded doors and let the 10’s or hundreds people in.
So, you have two choices:
Accept their intentions could very well be violent (probable cause is needed for deadly force), and use the choke point to your advantage by shooting anyone who breaches or is close to breaching the doors.
or
Hope and take the chance the are just protestors that just want to talk once they break in
My opinion exactly. The interlopers transgressed a final checkpoint/barricade that was protecting specific entities like maybe VP or Pelosi or??? She was the first one over the Final Barricade and she got shot dead to provide proof that if one transgressed this barricade Death was the final destination.
If one had entered the Capital thru force then one must expect to be shot when they had attained a critical objective guarded by professional bodyguards.
She breached a final barricade and was made an example of. God Help US. RIP brave lady.
VooDoo
If one had entered the Capital thru force then one must expect to be shot when they had attained a critical objective guarded by professional bodyguards.
She breached a final barricade and was made an example of. God Help US. RIP brave lady.
VooDoo
Anybody have the same opinion as wood that gun was pointed away and it’s all bullshit? I watched the slo-mo, and it almost looks that way. Can’t tell.
Also she was purportedly wearing a backpack concealed under her flag cape. Explosive devices had already been reported on scene.
I’m just going to keep my mouth shut in here since I’m relatively new here and have a low post count. Carry on.
John, are you going to be letting us know every time you have nothing to say?
Only until my post count gets high enough to where I won’t be looked at as a deep state spy.
The"explosives" were not found until later.
Freeze flight or fight. I'll wager that he was clueless as to what was happening 50 feet beyond his position. He was acting on his knowledge of the riots over the last year and he did what he perceived was the only thing that could be done. <------benefit
If proven that he acted otherwise.....all bets are off.
The shooter probably was notified that the building was breached and he barricaded his position. He had a position of cover when the glass was being broken. Once she started climbing through his brain went ohh shit, ohh shit ohh shit and he stepped out and shot.
Freeze flight or fight. I'll wager that he was clueless as to what was happening 50 feet beyond his position. He was acting on his knowledge of the riots over the last year and he did what he perceived was the only thing that could be done. <------benefit
If proven that he acted otherwise.....all bets are off.
Agree 100%. Unfortunately the adrenaline from the situation probably stopped her from thinking clearly of the situation in front of her. Unfortunate situation all around.
I guess the question i have was were they protecting property or were they protecting congress members?
Also, there’s at least one GOP rep who said he had conversation with the officer while they were trying to breach the barricaded door.
Basically, the plan was (not lightly) decided to shoot anyone who gets in or almost in. As once the doors are open.....good luck.
So, according to that account of the situation, it wasn’t an “oh shit” it was more of a “this sucks that I have to do this.” More than likely, anyone that got through or almost through was getting shot. It happened to be this woman.
Over the course of my career I’ve been in situations that were escalating and either had similar conversations with someone or in my own head. “If X happens, I’m going to shoot Y.”
It’s not a fun decision and you’re not always “right” as in if you had every single fact, maybe you don’t shoot. But with the facts you have at the time, it was the right decision.
Basically, the plan was (not lightly) decided to shoot anyone who gets in or almost in. As once the doors are open.....good luck.
So, according to that account of the situation, it wasn’t an “oh shit” it was more of a “this sucks that I have to do this.” More than likely, anyone that got through or almost through was getting shot. It happened to be this woman.
Over the course of my career I’ve been in situations that were escalating and either had similar conversations with someone or in my own head. “If X happens, I’m going to shoot Y.”
It’s not a fun decision and you’re not always “right” as in if you had every single fact, maybe you don’t shoot. But with the facts you have at the time, it was the right decision.
There were members on Congress behind the officer. There's zero doubt he shot to protect them.
This shooter will be on the list right after Lon Horiuchi in my book.
As a professional LE and instructor, I will give you the exact same advice.
You absolutely cannot make an objective adjudication based on one camera angle.
“Totality of the circumstances”
You have no idea what was relayed on the radio, you have no idea how far they already retreated. You have no idea how things sounded, looked, etc etc from that officer’s POV.
It may have absolutely been a bad shoot. But, you touting off that you’re an “instructor” and therefore that somehow gives you clairvoyance to know everything about the situation, is laughable at best and downright reckless/arrogant at worst.
Interesting.....This is the timeline citation I was going by.
WASHINGTON — DC Police said two pipe bombs and a cooler of Molotov cocktails were found near the US Capitol Building while Trump supporters began to riot in the area, eventually breaking into the building.
2 pipe bombs and cooler of Molotov cocktails found near Capitol Building amid Capitol riot, DC Police Chief says
Chief Contee said that a plain-clothes US Capitol Police officer is the one who shot and killed a woman inside the US Capitol Building.
www.wusa9.com
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. She deserved what she got. There has to be red lines, doesn’t matter what cause. This is a disgusting lose of control on the whole MAGA movement.
Protest is protected right. Rioting is crossing the line. “Looting starts, the shooting starts.” Sound familiar?
Watch the video of the cop being smashed in the door, having his mask ripped off while screaming in pain.....it will change your mind on these fucking animals. I have zero sympathy for any person injured while participating in that madness.
Mob mentality sickens me.
Protest is protected right. Rioting is crossing the line. “Looting starts, the shooting starts.” Sound familiar?
Watch the video of the cop being smashed in the door, having his mask ripped off while screaming in pain.....it will change your mind on these fucking animals. I have zero sympathy for any person injured while participating in that madness.
Mob mentality sickens me.
you know as well as i do that shootings are both incredibly macroscopic, and incredibly microscopic....and border on the microscopic in terms of legalities.
radio chatter.... largely irrelevant.
how far they had retreated.....largely irrelevant
what matters most is that specific microcosm around the shooting seconds before the shot was sent.....and we have that on video.....clear as fucking day.
what we have is an unarmed woman climbing over a barrier, surrounded by cops........she was actively using both hands to climb that barrier......how in gods green earth is she posing a "deadly threat" to anyone?....regardless of what angle you view it from.
if you are going to defend this.....actually articulate how that woman was a "deadly threat".
im going to say it.....if you think this was a "good" shoot.....you should not be in LE....period.
you dont have to be a clairvoyant....you just need to have fucking eyes and understand the law.
Take off the labels, ignore the flags.
Violent crowd breaks into a top secret government facility. Protected personnel are under immediate threat. While retreating, a final line barricade is erected, and breached.....a single shot is fired.
Good thing my 8152 trained self wasn’t there. I’d have stacked them deep.
Violent crowd breaks into a top secret government facility. Protected personnel are under immediate threat. While retreating, a final line barricade is erected, and breached.....a single shot is fired.
Good thing my 8152 trained self wasn’t there. I’d have stacked them deep.
...this isnt the military there butch...ROEs dont change because of the "status" of the personnel or how far they get into a building.
express in words how a 100lb unarmed woman climbing a wall is a "imminent deadly threat" and we can have a discussion
She showed herself to be a threat by smashing through the barrier....after felony trespassing into a controlled facility.
Wearing a backpack & draped in a flag....it’s a split second decision. If you are charged with the security of a person & you are losing that you have to respond.
Her life isn’t worth the risk she posed in that moment.
jesus christ the backpack argument again?.......you are a fucking moron.....
where is the IMMINENT THREAT OF DEATH OR BODILY HARM......simple question.....
not coulda shoulda woulda.....in the moment she was shot....using both hands to climb a wall.....how was she threatening death or bodily harm?
Because if the officer PRECEIVED an imminent threat he was justified.
Cops shoot unarmed people all the time & walk because of circumstances surrounding/ leading up to the shot.
Again she was part of a violent riot breaching a government facility & infliction physical harm on ppl. Actively breaching a final line of defense......how much more do you want?
Wrong.wrong.wrong
You are not justified if you 'think' someone is a threat...Hell, if that were the case, EVERY shooting would be"justified"
"Sorry your honor, he looked scary to me, I'll be declared not guilty now, thank you"
How about “Sorry your honor, my detail had retreated as far as possible & barricaded the door in protection of my charge. Then the violent mob smashed through, the individual was the first through the breach. I couldn’t be certain of the safety of me or my team. In that moment, I feared for my life.”
Don't fuck with lowlight.Wow
Is this all it takes to get banned here?
Do you often find yourself in houses without knowing who’s house your in?Wow
Is this all it takes to get banned here?
Nope, but I've never had to take my shoes off and tippy toe. I was just surprised at the quick trigger. Maybe there was a PM that lead to banning?
For everyone making the 100lbs woman argument and how she couldn't have been a threat.........
How was she a great soldier and did all those deployments?
Her size weight gender are not valid arguments. Action is all that matters to me.
How was she a great soldier and did all those deployments?
Her size weight gender are not valid arguments. Action is all that matters to me.
Wow
Is this all it takes to get banned here?
You should learn to mind your own business you’ll last longer
I'm fine with using a Graham v. O'Connor type standard. Overall I think using a reasonableness standard is fair. That is, would another person of similar training and background placed in the same situation with the same known facts and totality of circumstances make the same decision? To me, that's a giant "no", not just because I'm a prick, but because we've watched good men get fried for years using that approach. Goose, meet gander with some sauce.
By the way, in all the information the shooter had at the incident time, where was the eminent threat from the protesters that warranted a use of deadly force? I mean, all summer long I watched assholes hurl bricks, frozen water bottles and all kinds of shit at our LEO's. Cripes, they burned down a precinct and tried to light a federal courthouse on fire. I don't remember law enforcement shooting anyone. Maybe I missed it in all the chaos. But I am pretty sure they didn't.
Look, if you want to say that climbing through that window was poor, Darwin level decision making, I'm listening. You want to say that when it (maybe? Unverified) comes to protecting some member of Congress use of deadly force has a brand new meaning? No, hell no.
By the way, in all the information the shooter had at the incident time, where was the eminent threat from the protesters that warranted a use of deadly force? I mean, all summer long I watched assholes hurl bricks, frozen water bottles and all kinds of shit at our LEO's. Cripes, they burned down a precinct and tried to light a federal courthouse on fire. I don't remember law enforcement shooting anyone. Maybe I missed it in all the chaos. But I am pretty sure they didn't.
Look, if you want to say that climbing through that window was poor, Darwin level decision making, I'm listening. You want to say that when it (maybe? Unverified) comes to protecting some member of Congress use of deadly force has a brand new meaning? No, hell no.
Similar threads
