[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by OnTheRight

He wasn't driving at ICE enforcement officers, he was having a peaceful debate but if you think he deserved it you are, of course, welcome & free to have that opinion.

You are proving the point for me.

You decide who counts as human based on whether you like them. Peaceful debate for him. Deserved it for her.

Same outcome. A person dead by a gun. Suddenly context matters when it suits you.

[BBXX]

Anyone who watched the video and thinks she was intentionally driving at him doesn't know how physics works.

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by BBXX

Anyone who watched the video and thinks she was intentionally driving at him doesn't know how physics works.

I think you’ll find the people who are justifying it simply just don’t care about innocent people losing their lives at the hands of the Trump regime, their politics are more important than common decency

[OnTheRight]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

You are proving the point for me.

You decide who counts as human based on whether you like them. Peaceful debate for him. Deserved it for her.

Same outcome. A person dead by a gun. Suddenly context matters when it suits you.

One was debating and one was violently driving a car towards an agent.
Anyway good riddance to woke, bad rubbish.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by OnTheRight

One was debating and one was violently driving a car towards an agent.
Anyway good riddance to woke, bad rubbish.

You are not interested in facts or standards. You are interested in who you hate. One death gets sympathy. One gets celebration.

Woke. The magic word you throw out when thinking gets tiring.

It means whatever you need it to mean in that moment. Annoyed you. Disagreed with you. Existed in a way you dislike.

Slap woke on it and suddenly a dead person becomes bad rubbish. Very serious worldview. Very original. Edgy

[OnTheRight]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

You are not interested in facts or standards. You are interested in who you hate. One death gets sympathy. One gets celebration.

Woke. The magic word you throw out when thinking gets tiring.

It means whatever you need it to mean in that moment. Annoyed you. Disagreed with you. Existed in a way you dislike.

Slap woke on it and suddenly a dead person becomes bad rubbish. Very serious worldview. Very original. Edgy

Hee, hee.

[Glenn.]

Anyway

[arista]

Originally Posted by Maru

Border Patrol/CBP, not ICE.

Border Patrol agents shot 2 people in East Portland during 'targeted traffic stop,' DHS says
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/cri...1-5e536152e532

Thanks Maru
it was just on CNN


It was the Border Patrol Police who shot them,
in Portland.

[arista]

Live Sky News

The Mayor's Team are calling this
A Murder of the Lady (Renee Nicole Good)


Live 9:14AM Minneapolis

[arista]

[Livia]

Those activists need to review their training. And also take some responsibility...

[arista]

[arista]

Ice Agent Not to be Charged

[arista]

The Left Wing UK Newspaper

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Livia

Those activists need to review their training. And also take some responsibility...

Imo, their training worked because it achieved their end goal. They absolutely without a doubt wanted something like this to happen because look how they are romanticizing these deaths. They badly want people to believe the US is a tinderbox so that they can start something irreversible. The young are more likely to use language like "utilize their deaths properly", etc and that's a direct result of radicalization.

In Portland:

Edit: It's annoying I can't share any clips on X that aren't full on propaganda accounts. So much of X is AI, but it is useful for getting clips quickly without commentary.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by arista

Ice Agent Not to be Charged

This is the only result. If this were a civilian, the result would be the same. People forget, we have the right to self-defense in the US and if you legally own a firearm and are allowed to carry it, you are allowed to administer it in self-defense. Even if the Trump administration were unhappy with the political consequences, they can't do anything about that part of it. The only thing they can do is say he didn't do his duty. If she drove forward enough to make contact with him, that's close and shut for self-defense. Yes, even to turn. You're still intentionally hitting someone with your car and driving in a reckless manner. They do not get a pass because they're turning.

Cars can be 'dangerous weapons,' Minnesota high court rules
-The Minnesota Supreme Court found that drivers need not intend great bodily harm for their cars to be "likely to cause" it under the state's criminal code.

ST. PAUL, Minn. (CN) — The Minnesota Supreme Court determined Wednesday that cars driven recklessly can be considered dangerous weapons under the state’s criminal code.

Justice Anne McKeig penned the court’s opinion affirming the Minnesota Court of Appeals’ restoration of second-degree riot charges against Ayyoob Dawood Abdus-Salam, who promoted two intersection “takeover” events in spring of 2022.

At the events, drivers and a crowd would block off an intersection in Minneapolis, then spun donuts in their cars to show off the cars and the drivers’ skill. Both takeovers were filmed, and in one, a driver can be seen striking an observer with his car and sending him flying through the air to land head- or back-first on the pavement.

Vehicles are Likely Dangerous Weapons Says MN Supreme Court
https://ambroselaw247.com/vehicles-a...ons-mn-sup-ct/

In recent summers, car takeover events received significant press in the twin cities. A takeover is when a group of people get together with several vehicles and occupy a street, intersection, or parking lot, thus taking over the area. People do not like the ruckus. It can disrupt traffic. And, the vehicles can cause property damage when they start burning tires and doing donuts on the pavement. We blogged here about prosecutors responding to this summer-time activity with second degree riot charges.

Defense attorneys began to challenge such charges by arguing that there is not probable cause to believe vehicles fit the definition of dangerous weapons in these scenarios because the cars were operated in a controlled manner. After winning at the district court on such a challenge, the Minnesota Court of Appeals said no dice. It addressed the probable cause challenge in State v. Abdus-Salam and reversed the district court. The court reasoned that there was enough to meet the standard of probable cause because prosecutors provided enough evidence that “defendant knew that the cars would be driven with passengers hanging from them and in a reckless manner dangerously close to onlookers during an illegal intersection ‘take-over.’”

The Minnesota Supreme Court looked at two questions: (1) what does “likely” mean in the context of the statutory definition of dangerous weapon; and (2) did the district court err when dismissing the complaint for lack of probable cause.

...

Originally Posted by arista

[The woman was clearly an experienced and effective agitator,
but that doesn't mean she deserved to die]


Yes on the End of Thursday newsningt BBC2
A colleague confirmed she is an official observer

Is is sad case

She's an "official" observer in the same way a Sovereign Citizen reads a line in a book thinking they learned a superpower where they can yell at police "THaT's nOt yOur jUrISdiDtionn!". It's benign and potentially counterproductive because either these people don't actually understand the law or are they trying to evade consequences (disrupt).

[bots]

unfortunately, there are 2 groups determined to maximise this and both have ill intentions. At this point who can say what truly started anything. It's just a lot of people with bad intentions

[Maru]

Originally Posted by bots

unfortunately, there are 2 groups determined to maximise this and both have ill intentions. At this point who can say what truly started anything. It's just a lot of people with bad intentions

Yes, it's been politicized to a crazy extent. It really should be a few headlines and a warning from a sane federal head "Hey dumbass, don't do that, you will be hurt!" (but way calmer and more professional),... but we don't have sanity in our government anymore so they're all milking it.

[Maru]

Bodycam is out I guess:

Now we know why the wife admitted fault so fast.

[Glenn.]

The driver was calm. Even said to her murderer that she didn’t have a problem with him. Was moving the car to let people pass. Armed thugs swarmed the car.

[GiRTh]

There have been claims suggesting that political groups may have used this incident to support their broader arguments. Regardless of those claims, the central facts remain important.

Renee Good did not die by her own actions; she was shot by an ICE officer during a federal immigration operation. The officer involved had spent his career in federal immigration enforcement and had never served as a police officer. ICE officers operate under federal authority with powers that are limited to immigration‑related investigations and do not have the same jurisdiction as local or state police.

It is therefore inaccurate to imply that Good was responsible for her own death. The shooting was carried out by a federal agent acting within a specific, limited mandate.

Although the officer has been cleared in the initial review, it is possible that a civil lawsuit may follow, as is common in cases involving the use of force by federal personnel.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Maru

Imo, their training worked because it achieved their end goal. They absolutely without a doubt wanted something like this to happen because look how they are romanticizing these deaths. They badly want people to believe the US is a tinderbox so that they can start something irreversible. The young are more likely to use language like "utilize their deaths properly", etc and that's a direct result of radicalization.

In Portland:

Edit: It's annoying I can't share any clips on X that aren't full on propaganda accounts. So much of X is AI, but it is useful for getting clips quickly without commentary.

That person on Twitter has never studied history I see.

We wouldn't have half of the rights that we have today if it weren't for people taking the law into their own hands.

Obviously you have to pick your battles, but throughout history it has been the only way to get your voice heard sometimes.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Maru

Bodycam is out I guess:

Now we know why the wife admitted fault so fast.

Really shows how Fast
it went down

CNN USA is showing that video

[arista]

Even Ch4 News just shared the New Video
Cutting the sound of the swearing Ice agent

[BBXX]

Yes it's illegal to block the law from doing their job but not all crimes are equal.

Disrupting ICE agents who are hell bent on racially profiling, causing distress, shooting citizens and ruining families for a quick buck is a worthwhile cause to some people and is not a crime we should hold to the same standard as many others. Sometimes breaking the law for common good is important. Sometimes disrupting gross power for common good is important. I mean... the U.S just kidnaped the President of another country, which many experts believe breaks U.S and International law. But was it justified? And if you say it was, for the sake of the people of Venezuela not living under a Dictatorship, then you must believe disrupting power, even illegally, for the common good is important.

Baffles me we have so many people caring about civilians upholding laws to such a degree while supporting a convicted felon running the country. Wonder if they were so against radical protests when discussing Jan 6th.