Davin News Server

In article <10kjr2k$3rq66$10@dont-email.me>, nuh-
uh@nope.com says...
> 
> On 2026-01-18 15:37, Skeeter wrote:
> > In article <10kjp72$3rq8m$2@dont-email.me>, nuh-
> > uh@nope.com says...
> >>
> >> On 2026-01-18 15:00, Skeeter wrote:
> >>> In article <10kjo80$3qsla$6@dont-email.me>, nuh-
> >>> uh@nope.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2026-01-18 06:52, NoBody wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 17 Jan 2026 14:25:57 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2026-01-17 06:38, NoBody wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 11:19:59 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 2026-01-16 04:30, NoBody wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid intentionally and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no
> >>>>>>>>>>>> alternative to using deadly force.'
> >>>>>>>>>>> He did.  SHE changed that equation.
> >>>>>>>>>> He chose to remain there when a single step to his right would have
> >>>>>>>>>> taken him out of the danger area.
> >>>>>>>>> Laughter!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I love how you pretend to be an armchair expert on what could or could
> >>>>>>>>> not have been done.  She weaponized her vehicle and he perceived a
> >>>>>>>>> threat to his life and safety.  Legit shoot.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If she'd intended to drive into him, she wouldn't have been turning her
> >>>>>>>> steering wheel hard to the right...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Love how you armchair ICE agent.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> She reversed such that the vehicle was pointing towards him.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As he was walking to her left.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Good so you now admit she pointed her vehicle at him.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is a start for you.
> >>>>
> >>>> I admit she was reversing to complete a turn that would finish by
> >>>> driving away to her right.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> She gunned the gas so much that her tires spun.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The road was slippery.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yeah...duh.  I'm sure you were trying to make a point...
> >>>>
> >>>> That a slippery road means you don't have to "gun" the accelerator to
> >>>> spin the wheels.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> She actually DID hit him.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That is unproven.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> LAUGHTER!  All the video footage proves you to be a fool.
> >>>>
> >>>> Show a single frame of ANY video that shows the actual alleged contact.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> ...and therefore AWAY from him.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Irrelevent since she weaponized her vehicle.
> >>>>>>> Justified use of force.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Not according to any use of force policy that he could have been
> >>>>>> operating under
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Quote the exact relevant passage that says it doesn't.
> >>>>
> >>>> I already have, but...
> >>>>
> >>>> ...straight from the DHS website:
> >>>>
> >>>> '1-16.200 - USE OF DEADLY FORCE AND PROHIBITED RESTRAINT TECHNIQUES
> >>>>
> >>>> ...
> >>>>
> >>>> 2. Firearms may not be discharged solely to disable moving vehicles.
> >>>> Specifically, firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless:
> >>>> (1) a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person
> >>>> with deadly force by means other than the vehicle; or (2) the vehicle is
> >>>> operated in a manner that threatens to cause death or serious physical
> >>>> injury to the officer or others, and no other objectively reasonable
> >>>> means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path
> >>>> of the vehicle.'
> >>>>
> >>>> Read that last part until you get it:
> >>>>
> >>>> 'and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist,
> >>>> which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.'
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy-use-force>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> She saw a man moving across from her right to left, and how was she to
> >>>>>>>> know he'd stop moving?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Guess she should have made sure he was clear before she tried to run.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Maybe she would have if another agent hadn't rushed up with no warning
> >>>>>> and grabbed her driver's side door.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> LAUGHTER!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It's a crime to flee from the police.
> >>>>
> >>>> Irrelevant to whether shooting her was justified.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Duh.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This is basic logic here and you blame HIM for HER decisions.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I blame HIM for HIS decisions.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Laughter!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Specifically:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The decision to stop in front of a vehicle that was in motion a moment
> >>>>>> before and which he could see from the fact that she was steering to her
> >>>>>> right was going to be in motion again in another moment...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pick a video of your choosing and tell me the timestamps that you are
> >>>>> referring.
> >>>>
> >>>> His own cellphone video:
> >>>>
> >>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QYKTTEMf-Q>
> >>>>
> >>>> At 25 seconds, you can see in HIS OWN VIDEO that she is steering her
> >>>> wheel to the vehicle's right.
> >>>
> >>> Then why was she sideways in the road?
> >>
> >> Irrelevant to what we were discussing.
> > 
> > You mean you want to ignore it because it brings up
> > questions.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ...in direct violation of policies regarding tactical positioning of
> >>>>>> agents in such situations.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Laughter!  He was already aside...until SHE changed that.
> >>>>
> >>>> False. He was walking from the right side of her car towards the left
> >>>> side even before she began moving.
> >>>
> >>> And she hit him.
> >>>>
> >>>> At 21 seconds of the same video, you can see him continuing to circle
> >>>> the car BEFORE she starts moving backward with the steering turned to
> >>>> her left.
> >>>
> >>> Bullshit. We saw what we saw you commie prick.
> >>
> >> You're lying.
> > 
> > Nope. I also watched your peaceful protesters beat the
> > hell out of two people last night just because they didn't
> > agree. Today they stormed a church. A church fer
> > chrissake. A bunch of brainwashed domestic terrorists.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The decision to treat a vehicle as a threat when a step to his left
> >>>>>> would have completely obviated the need to use deadly force...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This armchair quarterbacking of yours is just silliness or stupidity
> >>>>> (pick one).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> ...in direct violation of his use of force policies.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Shall I quote them again for you?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please quote ONLY the relevent sentences that say if a vehicle is
> >>>>> proceeding towards you and your life is in danger that you are not
> >>>>> allowed to use lethal force.
> >>>>
> >>>> Done already.
> >>>
> >>> You are losing.
> >> 2. Firearms may not be discharged solely to disable moving vehicles.
> >> Specifically, firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless:
> >> (1) a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person
> >> with deadly force by means other than the vehicle; or (2) the vehicle is
> >> operated in a manner that threatens to cause death or serious physical
> >> injury to the officer or others, and no other objectively reasonable
> >> means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path
> >> of the vehicle.'
> > 
> > 
> > POLICY'S!!!!  SQUAWK  POLICY'S!!!!
> >>
> >> Read that last part until you get it:
> >>
> >> 'and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist,
> >> which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.'
> > 
> > If this is all you have for a defense then you will lose
> > in court.
> > 
> > 
> 
> I'm not going to court, doofus. Neither is Renee Good...
> 
> ...because she was MURDERED.

Nope and the court will show it wasn't murder.
> 
> The officer SHOULD go to court, because he had no need to employ deadly 
> force.

The left will see that he does. Unless he get a paid off 
judge like Trump got then he will be exonerated.