- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- 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: ICE Agent reportedly suffered internal bleeding from being hit by SUV
Posted on 1/14/26 at 1:43 pm to Harry Boutte
Posted on 1/14/26 at 1:43 pm to Harry Boutte
quote:
But I just think the bar for the government killing its citizens should be far higher than just:
It is higher than that.
She was killed because she raised the BAR to “accelerating a car towards a LEO”.
0
Posted on 1/14/26 at 1:44 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
So before I go through 10 pages, are we still pretending she didn't drive her car into an ICE agent?
I think there's about 3 Marxists that are still trying to believe she didn't.
They're now arguing with themselves about the medical definition of bruising and internal bleeding.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 3:02 pm to SpecialK_88
quote:
The reality is, it doesn’t matter if she made contact or not.
I agree. But not the way you're thinking.
quote:
and the moment the first shot was fired he was already out of the way
This is simply not true. The additional footage that has been most recently released clearly shows the first shot coinciding exactly with the impact (it's actually why his first shot missed).
quote:
Not to mention he was already going for his gun before the car moved forward as indicated by his cell phone switching hands during recording.
A completely irrelevant observation. So what? He could have pulled his weapon the moment he got out of the car and it would mean nothing.
quote:
It’s about...if the response was reasonable to stop the threat.
And this is where I believe you are exactly incorrect. In a situation like that you do not have time to analyze it to the degree you are pretending police are expected to analyze it to. The standard is whether a reasonable person would have perceived a threat to safety. At that point, using deadly force is permitted.
The standard is NOT, "Would a shot like this have saved the officer's life?" For two reasons:
1. It very well could have saved his life if her intention had been to straighten the wheels up and run directly over him, which in the split second that he made the decision to fire, he couldn't have been expected to ascertain.
2. The kind of standard you are suggesting is the typical nonsense of, "Well, couldn't you just have shot him in the arm and caused him to drop his gun? Did you have to shoot him in the chest/head and kill him? Shooting him in the arm would have neutralized the threat, why didn't you just do that?"
All of you hindsight armchair forensics experts for some reason think that a human being whose life is being threatened can reason all of this out in the 75 milliseconds that it took for her to jam on the gas and get shot. Can perceive that a car lurching forward and hitting you in the chest is not aiming at you, can determine the intent of the driver, etc.
It's silly bullshite.
It tells me you've never been in a similar situation before, and you have no perspective on it to the degree that you should really refrain from commenting on it.
Hank wants to comment because he's a lawyer and he wants to give his opinion on what will happen to the officer. O.k., fine. Maybe Hank can guess what happens in court (if it goes to court).
I'm not arguing on that basis because I'm about to the point that I don't think court means much anymore. Not when we're talking about cases with high political visibility in an area as partisan as Minnesota.
Might they find the guy guilty? Sure. That doesn't mean he actually is, though.
If we're going to tell police officers that they can't defend themselves when someone runs into them with a car, it won't take long before we don't have many people willing to serve as police officers.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 3:20 pm to wackatimesthree
facts
Posted on 1/14/26 at 3:24 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:Like it or not, that is exactly what the agent will have to establish, if he is prosecuted for the killing OR if he is sued by the family.
All of you hindsight armchair forensics experts for some reason think that a human being whose life is being threatened can reason all of this out in the 75 milliseconds that it took for her to jam on the gas and get shot. Can perceive that a car lurching forward and hitting you in the chest is not aiming at you, can determine the intent of the driver, etc.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 3:32 pm to RollTide1987
he got hit pretty hard in the chest by the car. some people dont understand how physics work. the car and the man had a collision, and the man being such a much smaller mass proportionally takes much more of the acceleration from the impact. that's why even low speed car strikes can cause massive injury
Posted on 1/14/26 at 3:43 pm to narddogg81
I would also add internal bleeding also doesn’t always show up immediately. My guess is he had a lingering issue and got it checked out in the last couple of days an it showed up in a scan.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 3:46 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
He's not going to be charged and qualified immunity.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 3:59 pm to Covingtontiger77
Maybe he was on xarelto
Posted on 1/14/26 at 6:58 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
Like it or not, that is exactly what the agent will have to establish, if he is prosecuted for the killing OR if he is sued by the family.
We'll see.
I've always allowed that you may be right about all that in court.
But if you are, it's absurd and asinine and I don't even know why we would have police if that's the case. No human being can be reasonably expected to be able to do that.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:03 pm to AGGIES
quote:
Is that a fancy way of saying he got a bruise?
It’s the fancy way of saying she used deadly weapon to strike an officer.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:09 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
Honest question. Why do you people feel the need to demonize the "other side" with proven lies? It is just strange.
This woman ran someone over because she thinks she’s fighting Nazis.
Why do you guys keep pushing this lie? Joe Biden said he ran for president based on a proven lie.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:10 pm to dgnx6
Relentless alter is a joke
Read past posts from hypothetical clown.
Read past posts from hypothetical clown.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:17 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:Correct.
she was previously arrested for putting out her cigarettes in the bare skin of Renee Good's children
---
False. This claim has been traced back to random Twitter account. There is NO RECORD of any such claim of abuse, prior to the ICE incident.
As far as I can tell, the only evidence of child abuse by Rebecca, was when she implored Renee, the mother of three, to "DRIVE, BABY, DRIVE !!!!"
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:22 pm to dgnx6
quote:I have never taken that position, so you would need to ask someone who has.
Honest question. Why do you people feel the need to demonize the "other side" with proven lies? It is just strange.quote:
This woman ran someone over because she thinks she’s fighting Nazis. Why do you guys keep pushing this lie?
If you want my speculation as to why the far Left make that sort of claim, I attribute it to ignorance. They tend to use the term "Nazi" to describe anyone doing anything that they do not like. Much like the far Right uses the term "Marxist."
So, now please answer MY questions.
Why do Trumpists keep repeating the lie that Good and/or her wife were investigated for child abuse, when there is ZERO record ANYWHERE of such an investigation?
And why do you not CORRECT those who make that bogus claim, when you see it? Why do you not want an HONEST debate regarding this incident?
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:22 pm to Sam Quint
Oh sure it is.
He had internal bleeding and was sent home later that afternoon.
I swear yall will literally believe ANYTHING that comes out of this clown arse administration.
He had internal bleeding and was sent home later that afternoon.
I swear yall will literally believe ANYTHING that comes out of this clown arse administration.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:23 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:Kudos for the honesty.
she was previously arrested for putting out her cigarettes in the bare skin of Renee Good's childrenquote:Correct.
False. This claim has been traced back to random Twitter account. There is NO RECORD of any such claim of abuse, prior to the ICE incident.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:24 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
Honesty lol
Posted on 1/14/26 at 7:26 pm to HeadLightBanDit
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/14/26 at 7:35 pm
Posted on 1/14/26 at 9:19 pm to HeadLightBanDit
quote:
He had internal bleeding and was sent home later that afternoon. I swear yall will literally believe ANYTHING that comes out of this clown arse administration.
you appear to have no medical experience, not all issues require admission to a hospital
Page 11 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News