New video shows officer's perspective in ICE shooting of Renee Good

[KrustyKrab]

I really am a whore for this, I swear ill let it burn eventually. But I just cant let go yet...

Hmmm.. I preface this by reminding you to remember I ONLY let AI think for me sometimes. When it agrees.

DHS might have just subverted justice to glorify it as heroic, villianize her as a terrorist, and brush aside the excessive force used. 

She definitely ignored commands. But "I know why Ruby lost her voice." They shot her BECAUSE she ignored commands. And this administration is incapable of admitting fault by design. 

They are right in that she "ignored commands" but wrong that she posed a threat any further to justify deadly force. It was her insolence to their authority that pulled the trigger. It was anger, not fear. 

And though that can't really be proven...

All minds are connected to "the great accessible and mutable web of not being able to hide behind lies anymore..."

And cops always tell the truth, right? They never go into CYA mode and justify their inappropriate or overzealous actions.

ETA** 

I can hear them all and they all say the same thing! Right now they say, "there are socks undermining your opinion," whatever that means... they're pretty confrontational sometimes.

WP, NYT and BBC says?

She ignored commands to stop and exit the vehicle and proceeded to run into him he was right to eliminate the threat.  

How is he “wrong” to stop a vehicle that’s been weaponized and in process of hitting himself and possibly others?  Make it make sense.  

I can’t believe this has to be repeated for some of you ad nauseum.

[chr0naut]

Look it up

Everywhere I have looked it up, there is such right for one person to kill another. It's very concept is contrary to the human right to life.

[chr0naut]

Only criminals would run into police and federal agents.

Unless it was accidental, like with loss of traction, or if the officer moved into the path of the car before the driver could react. Or if the driver was not in control of the vehicle (like if they were shot or otherwise incapacitated).

[Maxmars]

(In fact, no measure of this event in terms of guilt or culpability can have any place in justice once the bullet passed through her skull...)

No "intent" could be expressed... only momentum.

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

WP, NYT and BBC says?

She ignored commands to stop and exit the vehicle and proceeded to run into him he was right to eliminate the threat.  

How is he “wrong” to stop a vehicle that’s been weaponized and in process of hitting himself and possibly others?  Make it make sense.  

I can’t believe this has to be repeated for some of you ad nauseum.

 

What about what this video says?




Where he totally got hit by the car, and she wasnt noticably steering around him? 

How far did that car go? Regardless if getting shot caused a reflex. 

Seemed like she initially zipped off fast enough to knock him over had be been hit. There should be a body deflection of some sort. He moves uninterrupted and shoots her 3 times. 

HOW DID A CAR HITTING WITH THAT MUCH INITIAL TORQUE CAUSE NO OBSERVABLE IMMEDIATE REACTION? How did it not interrupt his shooting of one through windshield and two through the side?

Adrenaline do all that? 

Really, what reality OF PHYSICS AND LAWS OF MOTION is she not trying to stear around him and flee? 

He stayed too sturdy. Getting hit by the quarter panel of an accelerating SUV imparts a lot equal opposite reaction with the same amount of force when hitting something. 

The well of irony that is denying ignorance.

[Sky727]

Paid protestors and rioters... The cells need to be rolled up all the way to the source IMO.

[KrustyKrab]

Everywhere I have looked it up, there is such right for one person to kill another. It's very concept is contrary to the human right to life.

From the DOJ….

“Law enforcement and correctional officers of the Department of Justice may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.“

“Deadly force should not be used against persons whose actions are a threat solely to themselves or property unless an individual poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others in close proximity.”

[KrustyKrab]

 

What about what this video says?

shorts dont embed properly

Where he totally got hit by the car, and she wasnt noticably steering around him? 

How far did that car go? Regardless if getting shot caused a reflex. 

Seemed like she initially zipped off fast enough to knock him over had be been hit. There should be a body deflection of some sort. He moves uninterrupted and shoots her 3 times. 

HOW DID A CAR HITTING WITH THAT MUCH INITIAL TORQUE CAUSE NO OBSERVABLE IMMEDIATE REACTION?

Adrenaline do all that? 

Really, what reality OF PHYSICS AND LAWS OF MOTION is she not trying to stear around him and flee? 

He stayed too sturdy. Getting hit by the quarter panel of an accelerating SUV imparts a lot equal opposite reaction.  which is not observable.

2:10 mark clearly shows him being hit, he kind of rolls off the front corner to the side.  There’s definitely body deflection contrary to what you’re saying.   

Are you saying you can’t see what’s in the video?

[KrustyKrab]

[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image...671b1.jpeg]

JS……..

To add shorts remove the word short from the url, someone posted that this works!

[UltraBudgie]

 shorts dont embed properly

Do this: