i mean, you wont be offended right? its just that your posts in here are really triggering me.

I think it does matter. if the officer heard that he had a gun and perceived him moving his hands underneath him as rummaging around to grab his gun and acted on that as a deadly threat. it doesnt matter criminally really, the guy is dead, but could shed light on potentially charging the first shot officer. i dont think he gets charged in any case, but still. even if he perceived his lack of compliance and not laying still as a deadly threat in conjunction with the gun callout that's important. if anything it needs to be addressed at DHS training, because pepper spraying people is becoming super common. that's not a call for or against pepper spray, but if they're using it commonly they need to walk officers through the what comes next training. they do for cops, and cops dont use it often. ice officers now are prepping cans as they leave vehicles. invest in pepper spray now, its gonna moon.



lmao

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jan 28 2026 03:29pm

you i can ofc troll all day long m8. The US does not use non lethal. they are trained to be lethal. Also the US gov afaik said this guy was a would be ASSASSIN, so whats the big deal? they got a bad guy right? if the government calls American citizens terrorists then who are we to dispute that? we should toe the line. Those brave men were only following orders.......................

it really feels that Gaza and Venezuela have...loosened the chains on what can and cant be done. I think I need to go read a bit more about the current situation re: Republicans and Democrats in the US. I wonder what domestic gun sales in the US have been like over the last 12 months.

This post was edited by ferdia on Jan 28 2026 03:35pm

Well like I was saying it creates this really tortured and messy string of actions and justifications. The guy moving his hands may be a product of the guys grappling with him and pepper spraying him, so the officers may be causing the involuntary motions that then get consciously or subconsciously perceived as threatening. And given they had reason to use force in the first place, it diffuses the responsibility and guilt along each step of the chain. Its not like some easy transferred intent doctrine in 3rd degree murder where committing an inherently violent crime could lead to someone dying. That is precisely the mind boggling wilful misapplication and corruption of the law we saw in the Kim Potter case, where they argued that officer Potter was committing felony assault when she used a taser on a fleeing murder suspect, because they needed to establish an underlying crime to transfer intent to the mistake that caused Wright's death. All they needed to do at trial was kick up enough obfuscation and confusion that a jury could convict someone on a premise that's absolute bullshit and legally incomprehensible, because a prejudiced jury will convict someone regardless of the facts or logic. The chewbacca prosecution, I guess

That all speaks to the lens of culpability and legality and outcomes in this case. But if we're looking at the future and rules or changing we could change, eh, I think it falls into the same trap as legislating gun control around school shootings. Cases like this are so incredibly infrequent and unpredictable that any doctrine changes have vastly disproportionate consequences and will never avert a future scenario anyway.

now maybe they should be laying off the wanton pepper spray for other reasons, I probably agree with that

This post was edited by Goomshill on Jan 28 2026 03:40pm

ultimately, they were doing their job and he was in the way. there is simply no court in the US that would convict these heroes. everything happened so fast, he had a gun, he was resisting, he was a threat, he was a terrorist, sorry, Assassin, is the word the government used, he had to be neutralized!

what they need right now is really good PR. that does not require new leadership, but new leadership would probable help (but unlikely to occur).

The assassin bit is hilarious. It implies there was anyone important he was trying to get at.

Very simple tbh. Basic suicide by cop behaviour



This post was edited by El1te on Jan 28 2026 04:48pm

Do you think democrats defend illegal immigration because if they stop defending it they will lose a lot of their voter base? It's common sense and the law that you cannot enter countries without documentation. This is not a 2 sided debate.

But democrats aren't and I suspect that this is just another bait comment so I'll leave it at that.