US Politics

[Badger11]

You do realise law enforcement officers do not need to be invited before going to locations, don’t you? If they waited to be invited how would that work?

And this is the nub of the problem. Local law enforcement officers should be backing up ICE and providing support to ensure the job gets done whilst trying to maintain community relations.

Instead the local politicians have passed laws making it an offence for police to assist them and then complaining when ICE move in heavy handed.

 

[Ouzo Dan]

On a slight tangent I'd love to be an Ice deportation officer, a 4 year contract on $50,000 - $100,000 a year, being the US you can hunt, shoot & fish as much as you like, get to live in a red state, you get to pepper spray psychotic screeching communists in the face & if all that wasn't already good enough I get to deport Jesus back to Mexico.

Honestly it's the dream.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

This is not a fairy tale with a clear villain and a moral at the bottom. It’s a messy human situation where several people made bad decisions in quick succession, and pretending otherwise doesn’t help anyone sleep better at night.

Driving a vehicle toward a law enforcement officer is not a symbolic gesture. A car is not a protest sign. It is a large metal object designed to move fast. Once you point it at someone on foot, intent becomes irrelevant very quickly.
That does not mean the officer’s actions are beyond criticism. Drawing a firearm early was almost certainly an escalation, and in a calmer, better world, different tools might have been used.

Unfortunately, the real world runs on adrenaline. In that moment, the officer had no way of knowing whether the driver was about to stop, reverse, flee, or try again.

Law enforcement officers are paid to deal with disorder, but that does not mean they are immune to danger or magically able to read minds.

When someone refuses to comply and turns a tense interaction into a mobile hazard, they introduce what might politely be called an “occupational risk,” and what less politely could be called a very predictable outcome.

Her “wife” did not help. Interference, confusion, and emotional escalation poured petrol on a situation that was already on fire.
It is possible, and necessary, to hold two thoughts at once - that officers should be held to high standards and scrutinised when force is used, and that civilians do not become blameless simply because they dislike authority. Protest does not come with diplomatic immunity.

If accountability is the goal, honesty is required. You cannot light the matches, complain about the smoke, and then act shocked when the fire alarm goes off.

responsibility’s can be shared, that bad outcomes often come from a series of poor choices, and that shouting “only one side is at fault” is easier than thinking.

I speak to someone whose dad was in the police for 35 years and died on this day five years ago. He was the calmest person I know. He had been shaking his head at the hand ringing on both sides.

In a general sense all you say is sensible. In the specific circumstances of this case they don’t apply! Why? Because the lady didn’t point the car at the officer’s foot, or any other part of him. If there was any contact, which is uncertain, it was only very minimal and either accidental or initiated by him. Of course officers are also humans with the emotions and frailties we all possess. However they are, or should be, trained humans ready to deal with sudden escalations. Unlike the members of the public they are dealing with.

In my opinion there was no valid, or defensible, reason why the officer had any reason to even draw his gun, let alone use it. It was a reaction to something. Not an attempt to stop something. It was an act of anger which eliminated a life, not a threat.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

And this is the nub of the problem. Local law enforcement officers should be backing up ICE and providing support to ensure the job gets done whilst trying to maintain community relations.

Instead the local politicians have passed laws making it an offence for police to assist them and then complaining when ICE move in heavy handed.

Local law enforcement officers should be ensuring that the law is enforced and that peace is maintained. If anyone comes into their area of jurisdiction it’s their responsibility to see that they comply. ICE officers are not above, or immune from, the law, whether State or Federal. They have a specific, limited, role to perform. Step outside of it, do anything illegal, and they are as subject to local law enforcement as everyone else.

Local law enforcement backing up ICE means they must observe what they do and intervene when they break local laws.

This event has tipped the balance and we are about to see a much more coordinated and aggressive response from local legislators and police authorities. Cases have already been brought seeking the removal of ICE agents.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

So how about she zooms off down the road and wipes out some people with her car as guarantee there would have been a car chase. If she wasn’t prepared to stop there she wasn’t going to voluntarily stop at all. Potentially she was Collateral damage for protection of others. How many drunk drivers make the wrong choice and end up still alive !

If you accepted that argument for him shooting her it would authorise every policeman with a gun to shoot any motorist they claimed they thought was driving erratically.

There was no evidence that she was doing anything more than trying to escape from a situation she had found uncomfortable.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Maybe they had a warrant to arrest a 3rd party/parties but the lady was obstructing their attempts to execute the warrant

There is no evidence of that being the case. No such claim has been made and at no time was she told she was obstructing the service of a legally authorised warrant so her compliance was necessary. A quiet word generally works wonders. Aggressive bullying doesn’t.

 

[Spiderman]

There is no evidence of that being the case. No such claim has been made and at no time was she told she was obstructing the service of a legally authorised warrant so her compliance was necessary. A quiet word generally works wonders. Aggressive bullying doesn’t.

Unfortunately many demonstrators these days are so rabid that, a quiet word is not sufficient. You only have to watch videos of present day demos to see this

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Unfortunately many demonstrators these days are so rabid that, a quiet word is not sufficient. You only have to watch videos of present day demos to see this

Of course true. When facing a mass demonstration having a quiet word is impossible.

Much easier when facing one, apparently calm, lady in a car.