4 ms·

The results quite explicitly show how lacking the training is for these ICE agents. It was unnecessary to shoot the woman even if doing so could potentially be

The results quite explicitly show how lacking the training is for these ICE agents. It was unnecessary to shoot the woman even if doing so could potentially be a good way to stop someone that is driving towards you, but it also patently is not a good way as evidenced by the fact that doing it caused the car to accelerate significantly more than it ever did before she was shot, before it crashes into the parked cars. Many police departments have explicit policies here. The DOJ does: https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy-use-force#1-16.200 https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-16000-department-justice-policy... ICE is part of DHS, and DHS has policies as well, though not as explicit as the DOJ's: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/mgmt/law-enforcement/mgmt-dir_044-05-department-policy-on-the-use-of-force.pdf https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/mgmt/la... They're explicitly prohibited from using deadly force unless they reasonably believe their life is in danger or they are under threat of significant bodily harm, which is obviously not the case here. It's also explicitly prohibited to use it just because a subject is fleeing, unless they have reason to believe the subject fleeing will allow them to kill or significantly injure others - again, obviously not the case here. The ICE agent acted in a way that goes against DHS policy, against standard policy in general, and in a way that would have zero productive outcomes even ignoring the fact he murdered some poor lady.

iugtmkbdfil834 9mo ago
<< It was unnecessary to shoot the woman even if doing so could potentially be a good way to stop someone that is driving towards you Full disclosure. I have/had some cops in my extended family so I might come across as biased. If someone is driving towards you and there is an indication it may hurt you, all bets are off. It is a simple question of survival. Now, a lot will rest on that 'reasonably', but based on the video alone, it is not nearly as clear as some would have you believe that he could not reasonably believe that his life was in danger. You may disagree with it, but that is the current state. We can talk about adjusting the policy, but thats day after considerations.
- cthalupa 9mo ago
  I disagree, and have direct personal experience in having cars moving towards me at that sort of range and that sort of speed. I was afraid I might get my foot run over or bashed about a bit, but it was plainly obvious to me, even in the moment, that unless I intentionally did something very stupid there was no risk of anything more than maybe a broken bone, and that even avoiding that would be trivial. But we can ignore that and work from the idea that he could reasonably fear for his life there. It doesn't matter. Because again: Shooting someone driving a car towards you at that distance makes you MORE LIKELY TO GET HIT. As evidenced by the fact the car wildly accelerates and is out of control after she is shot. It is one of the reasons that officers are often explicitly trained not to shoot at someone driving a car towards you at that sort of distance - because it isn't effective!
- defrost 9mo ago
  My stance (and I have interacted with Commonwealth LEO's, lawyers, and prosecutors about this very question) is this was a failure of training and procedure. Forget this "last mile" analysis where you're looking at a crowd of agents about a car in slow motion and an officer standing in front with an already drawn weapon. Less than a minute earlier that vehicle was motionless and parked up. Everything that followed happened as a direct result of ICE agents acting as they acted. One of them yelled and screamed at the driver from the get go, attempted to reach in through the window to open the door and waved a weapon. Another put themselves in front of the vehicle and drew a weapon .. which likely wasn't seen by the driver as they were busy trying to reverse, turn, and get out of there .. it's entirely possible the first time they saw the shooter was an instant before the shot. As a reasonable good and honest citizen "on the Clapham omnibus" how would you react to people that beeline in on you in that manner? Do that repeatedly and events like this will occur with frequency. ICE is a clown show and politicised from the outset to maximise this kind of stupidity.
  - iugtmkbdfil834 9mo ago
    << As a reasonable good and honest citizen "on the Clapham omnibus" how would you react to people that beeline in on you in that manner? Honestly, I am not sure and tbh most of us will hopefully never have to find out. That said, I can tell you what I did when the raids were happening in Chicagoland. I stayed home and when I did go out, I took papers with. Why? Because there is one sure way to not get oneself in trouble: not being where trouble are. That is why my first question is: why was she there to begin with? << Do that repeatedly and events like this will occur with frequency. I won't lie. It is a concern. << clown show and politicised from the outset to maximise this kind of stupidity. Look at the bright side, if there is a chance to limit some of the police powers at federal level, I could not see a better opportunity.

iugtmkbdfil834 9mo ago

<< It was unnecessary to shoot the woman even if doing so could potentially be a good way to stop someone that is driving towards you Full disclosure. I have/had some cops in my extended family so I might come across as biased. If someone is driving towards you and there is an indication it may hurt you, all bets are off. It is a simple question of survival. Now, a lot will rest on that 'reasonably', but based on the video alone, it is not nearly as clear as some would have you believe that he could not reasonably believe that his life was in danger. You may disagree with it, but that is the current state. We can talk about adjusting the policy, but thats day after considerations.

cthalupa 9mo ago
I disagree, and have direct personal experience in having cars moving towards me at that sort of range and that sort of speed. I was afraid I might get my foot run over or bashed about a bit, but it was plainly obvious to me, even in the moment, that unless I intentionally did something very stupid there was no risk of anything more than maybe a broken bone, and that even avoiding that would be trivial. But we can ignore that and work from the idea that he could reasonably fear for his life there. It doesn't matter. Because again: Shooting someone driving a car towards you at that distance makes you MORE LIKELY TO GET HIT. As evidenced by the fact the car wildly accelerates and is out of control after she is shot. It is one of the reasons that officers are often explicitly trained not to shoot at someone driving a car towards you at that sort of distance - because it isn't effective!
defrost 9mo ago
My stance (and I have interacted with Commonwealth LEO's, lawyers, and prosecutors about this very question) is this was a failure of training and procedure. Forget this "last mile" analysis where you're looking at a crowd of agents about a car in slow motion and an officer standing in front with an already drawn weapon. Less than a minute earlier that vehicle was motionless and parked up. Everything that followed happened as a direct result of ICE agents acting as they acted. One of them yelled and screamed at the driver from the get go, attempted to reach in through the window to open the door and waved a weapon. Another put themselves in front of the vehicle and drew a weapon .. which likely wasn't seen by the driver as they were busy trying to reverse, turn, and get out of there .. it's entirely possible the first time they saw the shooter was an instant before the shot. As a reasonable good and honest citizen "on the Clapham omnibus" how would you react to people that beeline in on you in that manner? Do that repeatedly and events like this will occur with frequency. ICE is a clown show and politicised from the outset to maximise this kind of stupidity.
- iugtmkbdfil834 9mo ago
  << As a reasonable good and honest citizen "on the Clapham omnibus" how would you react to people that beeline in on you in that manner? Honestly, I am not sure and tbh most of us will hopefully never have to find out. That said, I can tell you what I did when the raids were happening in Chicagoland. I stayed home and when I did go out, I took papers with. Why? Because there is one sure way to not get oneself in trouble: not being where trouble are. That is why my first question is: why was she there to begin with? << Do that repeatedly and events like this will occur with frequency. I won't lie. It is a concern. << clown show and politicised from the outset to maximise this kind of stupidity. Look at the bright side, if there is a chance to limit some of the police powers at federal level, I could not see a better opportunity.