- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: For Anybody Here Who Thinks the ICE Agent Acted Wrongly, Tell Me What He Should've Done
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:04 pm to RougeDawg
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:04 pm to RougeDawg
quote:
But unless that car can drive sideways or she is aiming a gun at him, the shots from the side are unlawful.
No it's not. He is trained to end the threat. He followed proper procedure.
Look if y'all haven't ever researched police procedures then it's best to just stfu.
1
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:05 pm to SOSFAN
The view into the liberal mindset provided by these threads is scary. I can't imagine trying work with or around these people where critical thinking may be required. The left has lost all sense of cause and effect. The path to her death started as soon as she decided to go frick around with ICE. And she recieved the ultimate find out for her efforts.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:08 pm to faraway
quote:
stop with the drama. she in no way was trying to run over him.
Sure about that? Watch the wheels between 0:05 and 0:11 seconds
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:09 pm to dalefla
quote:
The path to her death started as soon as she decided to go frick around with ICE. And she recieved the ultimate find out for her efforts.
100% agreed. She was in the middle of performing a felony. Who knows if she was thinking to use her vehicle as a weapon. The law only requires the officer believing his life was in danger. Had she not performed the FA portion she wouldn't have had to deal with the FO portion.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:15 pm to The Pickwick
quote:
After watching the cell phone video and hearing the audio, I would make the arguments that she did not use her vehicle as a weapon and his life was not in danger at all.
The second she disobeyed orders and took off, her vehicle was considered a weapon.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:21 pm to RougeDawg
quote:
Unfortunately, this is the answer. He could have unloaded the magazine through the windshield on her. But unless that car can drive sideways or she is aiming a gun at him, the shots from the side are unlawful. Same reason why you can't shoot someone in the back if they failed to murder you and then start to run off.
LE get to shoot to finish the threat. It’s not like he waited and shot 10 seconds later through the rearview. Guys were still in contact with the car.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:26 pm to KCT
This was 100% justified and SUPER NECESSARY. Impeding a federal LE operation and then trying to ram a cop to get away from being arrested has to register in leftists' psyche that it's not a wise move.
This will reduce their boldness and if necessary ICE or any federal LE should have an option to bodybag few more nuts who want to try it.
This is what a lawful society operates on. If you don't obey basic agreed upon rules, you don't get to keep your freedom or life. We all agreed on that.
This will reduce their boldness and if necessary ICE or any federal LE should have an option to bodybag few more nuts who want to try it.
This is what a lawful society operates on. If you don't obey basic agreed upon rules, you don't get to keep your freedom or life. We all agreed on that.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:32 pm to crewdepoo
quote:
‘It stands to reason that, if police officers are justified in firing at a suspect in order to end a severe threat to public safety, the officers need not stop shooting until the threat has ended,’ wrote Justice Alito
quote:
This 9-0 SCOTUS Decision Makes Clear Law Enforcement’s Right To Stop Threats To Public Safety
https://thefederalist.com/2026/01/08/this-9-0-scotus-decision-makes-clear-law-enforcements-right-to-stop-threats-to-public-safety/
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:45 pm to deeprig9
quote:
The additional shots, after out of harm's way, are going to be problematic for him.
Who's to say the ICE officer was out of harm's way? Maybe she was about to spin her truck around for another run at him.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:55 pm to Saint Alfonzo
quote:Who's to say that she wasn't supported by a rooftop sniper, just waiting to drop an ICE agent? Or maybe by space aliens, armed with a disintegrator ray?quote:Who's to say the ICE officer was out of harm's way? Maybe she was about to spin her truck around for another run at him.
The additional shots, after out of harm's way, are going to be problematic for him.
Here's the thing. His behavior will not be judged based upon crazy-assed hypotheticals. It will be judged based upon the objective facts.
And the objective facts are (a) that we can debate the propriety of that first shot, but (b) that second and third shot left his weapon well after he was in ZERO danger of being hit by Good's vehicle.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:58 pm to The Pickwick
quote:
Probably shoot her tires
This statement alone certifies you as 100% retarded.
Just for fun what happens when the tires get shot out?
Posted on 1/9/26 at 6:58 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
Your fake attorney skills are nearly as impressive as SFP
Posted on 1/9/26 at 7:01 pm to crewdepoo
quote:
Step out of the way
He was walking out of the way…until she hit him with her car.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 7:02 pm to SOSFAN
Don't f$ck around with people that are heavily armed. I mean how stupid can you be. Something you should learn very early on in life. They carry a gun for a reason. It's not cosplay.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 7:02 pm to Rip Torn
quote:Either of us would leave you quivering in a puddle of your own urine, were we to debate in a neutral forum.
Your fake attorney skills are nearly as impressive as SFP
Posted on 1/9/26 at 7:02 pm to deeprig9
quote:
The US Supreme Court won't be his judge or jury. Also, the threat is over as soon as he clears the vehicle and has already made his first shot.
You are wrong
quote:
"We think our decision in Brosseau v. Haugen, 543 U. S. 194 (2004) (per curiam) squarely demonstrates that no clearly established law precluded petitioners’ conduct at the time in question. In Brosseau, we held that a police officer did not violate clearly established law when she fired at a fleeing vehicle to prevent possible harm to “other officers on foot who [she] believed were in the immediate area, . . . occupied vehicles in [the driver’s] path[,] and . . . any other citizens who might be in the area.... In Brosseau, an officer on foot fired at a driver who had just begun to flee and who had not yet driven his car in a dangerous manner...."
"We now consider respondent’s contention that, even if the use of deadly force was permissible, petitioners acted unreasonably in firing a total of 15 shots. We reject that argument. It stands to reason that, if police officers are justified in firing at a suspect in order to end a severe threat to public safety, the officers need not stop shooting until the threat has ended. As petitioners noted below, “if lethal force is justified, officers are taught to keep shooting until the threat is over.”
9-0 decision in Plumhoff v. Rickard, 2014.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 7:05 pm to crewdepoo
Then what? Let her escape? As long as a criminal is in a vehicle... they become immune to being held accountable for their actions?
Trying to run over an leo already shows she had intent to maim or kill. Would've been pure incompetence if law enforcement allowed her to escape. The next time she attempted to kill an ice agent.... she may have succeeded.
Trying to run over an leo already shows she had intent to maim or kill. Would've been pure incompetence if law enforcement allowed her to escape. The next time she attempted to kill an ice agent.... she may have succeeded.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 7:08 pm to The Pickwick
quote:
So you can legally kill someone for trying to get away ???
Why are you trying to frame the argument contrary to all the visual evidence.
She had an opportunity to get away for the vast majority of the time of every recorded moment. She would still be alive today if she had.
But she was died because she chose to drive into a person who perceived it may cause him serious bodily harm and possibly death.
Why did you leave out the part about driving into an officer? Seems to be a critical element, no?
Posted on 1/9/26 at 7:10 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
the objective facts are (a) that we can debate the propriety of that first shot, but (b) that second and third shot left his weapon well after he was in ZERO danger of being hit by Good's vehicle.
His police training was to end the threat. Any , so called attorney, should know that. Please stop you're embarrassing yourself.
Posted on 1/9/26 at 7:10 pm to FutureMikeVIII
quote:
Taking a person’s life didn’t stop the car……..
I saw it stop.
But after she drove into the officer, it took a short distance.
Page 5 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News