4 ms·

I don’t think this is as clear cut as anyone on either side is claiming. Looking [1], it does appear that Renee attempted to run the car right into the ICE off

I don’t think this is as clear cut as anyone on either side is claiming. Looking [1], it does appear that Renee attempted to run the car right into the ICE officer, the wheels were still pointing slightly left, and the officer was still in front of the car. Also in [2] you can see that she was looking directly at the officer during this initial acceleration attempt. The only thing that saved the officer in that initial attempt was the loss of traction due to the icy road. After that, indeed the wheels were pointing away from the officer and arguably there was no more danger to him, but after the clear attempt to hit him, you cannot realistically expect the officer, in a split second, to re-evaluate if her intentions to hurt anybody changed or not. At this point his life was already threatened. He doesn’t know what she is doing and waiting to find out could mean that he is dead. [1] https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/2008984798271094791 https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/2008984798271094791 [2] https://x.com/nicksortor/status/2009683575298211979 https://x.com/nicksortor/status/2009683575298211979

deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]
throwawayqqq11 9mo ago
It gets quite clear, when you change the setup a little bit. 1) Make the PO a regular human without a gun and you can imagine, that any normal person would have made just a quick sidestep to avoid collision, like most of us have experienced in person too. Use of force was totally unjustified, esp. when you combine it with: 2) Change the intetion of the driver to really want to harm the person ~2m in front of the car. Cop get trained, that you should not use your gun on close encounters with knives, bc the short distance <5m will give you not enogh time to stop a knive attacker reliably. If you stand that close infront of a car, a short but strong tab of the pedal would have been enough to get you, no matter how fast you draw your gun or how good your aim is. To me, it is clear that she never ment to hit anybody, the acceleration does not indicate it. It is _very_ obvious. 2/3 shots hit the side of the car and the front wheel _never_ pointed at the PO.
- bananabiscuit 9mo ago
  the front wheel never pointed at the PO. My whole point is that this isn’t true. Look at the first video I linked, in the first couple of seconds, the cop is in front of the bumper, the cars wheels are still pointing slightly to the left, on their way to center, as she guns the engine. The loss of traction on the icy road is the only reason the PO had a chance to jump out of the way (but apparently by the NYT analysis, he might have been still hit). And at this point he is correct to think the driver is dangerous and might harm somebody.
  - _DeadFred_ 9mo ago
    ICE has routinely done this to protestors, on film. Are you saying those occurrences were attempted murder and ICE should be prosecuted? If it's an offense worthy of a mother being murdered and a child orphaned, extrajudicially on the street, then surely the much lighter sentence of imprisonment for attempted murder by ICE officers would be called for, all things being the same, correct? At the least they should be tried and taken to court, wouldn't you agree?
    - bananabiscuit 9mo ago
      I have only looked at this incident closely. If in other incidents ICE agents ran down civilians, yes, of course they should be taken to trial.
      - fzeroracer 9mo ago
        There was another incident last month in Minneapolis where ICE ran down a citizen with their car [1]. Do you agree that the appropriate response in that situation would be to respond with lethal force in accordance with your previous stances here? Now, why do you think ICE agents are not being taken to trial? Why do you think the federal government is doing all that they can to protect them? And why are you, specifically, working overtime to give them the benefit of the doubt? [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/ICE_Watch/comments/1pjye82/ice_agents_in_minneapolis_mn_hit_a_community/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ICE_Watch/comments/1pjye82/ice_agen...
_DeadFred_ 9mo ago
ICE has routinely done much worse driving, on video, to/at people protesting them. Are you saying ICE has REPEATEDLY, ON FILM, attempted murder? And that neither their leadership, nor the ICE protestors, cared about these video taped attempted murder attempts? Are you calling for ICE to be prosecuted for attempted murder for such actions if they are on film? Up until now ICE administrators were just fine with their officers doing equal/worse than what this now dead woman did. Or is it this administration's policy that some animals are more equal than others. Reminder the day before this occurred the officials that called the murdered woman a terrorist said that Jan6 was peaceful.
- bananabiscuit 9mo ago
  Yeah, that would be good. ICE should be prosecuted for all their murder attempts. I just don’t think it’s beyond a doubt that this one in particular was a murder.
  - metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
    Would you support shooting the ICE driver who made vehicle contact with the protestors when trying to make way? Another scenario, imagine your family member pulling out her parked car when a group of masked gunmen with "POLICE" in very honest-to-god letters printed on their jacket emerge and surround the car. Your family member feels scared as couple of them approach her side door shouting to come out. She finds an opening to escape but makes contact with one of the masked man with gun who just walked in front of car. Does that justify the driver being shot? What about the 2nd and 3rd shot in the face when the masked man is clearly on side? And then the government calls that masked gunman very brave because the person in car was very clearly a terrorist. Welcome to fascism. End of another great empire has begun.
    - bananabiscuit 9mo ago
      You describe a very unfortunate situation, and it’s the reason why impersonating an officer is such a serious crime. In the case at hand, however, there is no mistaken identity. I think for there to be any chance for government officers to do their jobs, and for there to not be any pointless deaths, their authority should never be challenged in the streets, and if they do abuse that authority, the officer should be severely punished.
UncleMeat 9mo ago
Wait. Looking at the officer is a threat now?
- bananabiscuit 9mo ago
  This seems like an intentional misunderstanding to me, but I’ll clarify anyway: What I said was that she was looking directly at the officer while having her wheels pointed in his direction and accelerating hard (to the point that she lost traction). The looking detail is important because then you can’t claim she didn’t see the officer was in her way because she was still looking back from her reversing maneuver. It makes it more clear that she was intentionally trying to hit the officer with her car.
  - UncleMeat 9mo ago
    I really have no idea how a human being can look at this video and not see a murder. I'm frightened of you.
    - bananabiscuit 9mo ago
      That’s interesting, because I’m actually also frightened. But the thing that scares me is how quick everyone wants to jump to conclusions as long as it supports their existing world view.
      - luke5441 9mo ago
        It's not about a world view. It is about watching a video and seeing what is happening. Unless you mean "world view" is my knowledge about how cars and guns work.
        bananabiscuit 9mo ago
        I watched the video and I saw Renee attempt to hit the ICE agent with her car. After doing that, lethal force is unfortunately on the table. The officer doesn’t have time after that to wait and see if she is going to try to kill him again or not.
metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
First shot is a red herring. It might be legal in the US to shoot the driver trying to hit you when are already out of the vehicle's way. The more condemnatory are the 2nd and 3rd shot from the side window. This is pure cruelty and disregard of human life which in a parallel universe could be one of your family member. Anyone justifying this deserves no sympathy from rest of the human populace.
- bananabiscuit 9mo ago
  Once the officer sees that Renee attempted to hit him with her car, he (tragically indeed) has the right to use lethal force. When somebody tries to kill you, I don’t think it’s reasonable to (in that same split second) give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they won’t try to immediately kill you or one of your partners again.
  - empath75 9mo ago
    Have you stopped to consider how you got to the point that you are defending this. Like, I get sort of working this over in your mind to yourself, but you have gone out of your way to excuse a cop gunning down a mom that just dropped off her kid at school. She had stuffed animals sitting in her dashboard. Her kid is an orphan. You didn't have to do this. You could have just stayed silent. Now you're the guy that is going to defend secret police murdering people in broad daylight.
    - metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
      I have been curious about this as well. So far what I have discovered, for a significant section, it is schadenfreude borne out of their past injustice. It roughly translates to: nobody was on my side when I was kicked down and this is my moment to rejoice where others like the victim do not have privilege to human dignity either and therefore assuaging the previous resentful assumptions to the contrary.
    - bananabiscuit 9mo ago
      I think this situation is very tragic, and I wish it had not happened. The reason I am taking this stance, is because I think that, unless they are fine with becoming a martyr, people should not go and mess with government officers in the streets. Yeah, I know: “victim blaming”, but there is a difference between officers descending upon a blameless victim vs. you going out looking to make trouble with authority. Even in the first case, the right thing to do (if you value your life) is to comply with the instructions (even if illegal) and challenge them in court later.
luke5441 9mo ago
I'm getting really depressed here that people watch those videos and actually think this was not murder. It's like they live in a different reality or something.
- zahlman 9mo ago
  Please explain what you think the word "murder" means, first. Then please explain your understanding of the law, with regards to the circumstances under which LEO are permitted to use their weapons. Then please watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDda-L_ZOE8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDda-L_ZOE8 and cite at least one point of disagreement with the legal argument presented, on any objective grounds (factual or legal).

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]

throwawayqqq11 9mo ago

It gets quite clear, when you change the setup a little bit. 1) Make the PO a regular human without a gun and you can imagine, that any normal person would have made just a quick sidestep to avoid collision, like most of us have experienced in person too. Use of force was totally unjustified, esp. when you combine it with: 2) Change the intetion of the driver to really want to harm the person ~2m in front of the car. Cop get trained, that you should not use your gun on close encounters with knives, bc the short distance <5m will give you not enogh time to stop a knive attacker reliably. If you stand that close infront of a car, a short but strong tab of the pedal would have been enough to get you, no matter how fast you draw your gun or how good your aim is. To me, it is clear that she never ment to hit anybody, the acceleration does not indicate it. It is _very_ obvious. 2/3 shots hit the side of the car and the front wheel _never_ pointed at the PO.

bananabiscuit 9mo ago
the front wheel never pointed at the PO. My whole point is that this isn’t true. Look at the first video I linked, in the first couple of seconds, the cop is in front of the bumper, the cars wheels are still pointing slightly to the left, on their way to center, as she guns the engine. The loss of traction on the icy road is the only reason the PO had a chance to jump out of the way (but apparently by the NYT analysis, he might have been still hit). And at this point he is correct to think the driver is dangerous and might harm somebody.
- _DeadFred_ 9mo ago
  ICE has routinely done this to protestors, on film. Are you saying those occurrences were attempted murder and ICE should be prosecuted? If it's an offense worthy of a mother being murdered and a child orphaned, extrajudicially on the street, then surely the much lighter sentence of imprisonment for attempted murder by ICE officers would be called for, all things being the same, correct? At the least they should be tried and taken to court, wouldn't you agree?
  - bananabiscuit 9mo ago
    I have only looked at this incident closely. If in other incidents ICE agents ran down civilians, yes, of course they should be taken to trial.
    - fzeroracer 9mo ago
      There was another incident last month in Minneapolis where ICE ran down a citizen with their car [1]. Do you agree that the appropriate response in that situation would be to respond with lethal force in accordance with your previous stances here? Now, why do you think ICE agents are not being taken to trial? Why do you think the federal government is doing all that they can to protect them? And why are you, specifically, working overtime to give them the benefit of the doubt? [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/ICE_Watch/comments/1pjye82/ice_agents_in_minneapolis_mn_hit_a_community/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ICE_Watch/comments/1pjye82/ice_agen...

_DeadFred_ 9mo ago

ICE has routinely done much worse driving, on video, to/at people protesting them. Are you saying ICE has REPEATEDLY, ON FILM, attempted murder? And that neither their leadership, nor the ICE protestors, cared about these video taped attempted murder attempts? Are you calling for ICE to be prosecuted for attempted murder for such actions if they are on film? Up until now ICE administrators were just fine with their officers doing equal/worse than what this now dead woman did. Or is it this administration's policy that some animals are more equal than others. Reminder the day before this occurred the officials that called the murdered woman a terrorist said that Jan6 was peaceful.

bananabiscuit 9mo ago
Yeah, that would be good. ICE should be prosecuted for all their murder attempts. I just don’t think it’s beyond a doubt that this one in particular was a murder.
- metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
  Would you support shooting the ICE driver who made vehicle contact with the protestors when trying to make way? Another scenario, imagine your family member pulling out her parked car when a group of masked gunmen with "POLICE" in very honest-to-god letters printed on their jacket emerge and surround the car. Your family member feels scared as couple of them approach her side door shouting to come out. She finds an opening to escape but makes contact with one of the masked man with gun who just walked in front of car. Does that justify the driver being shot? What about the 2nd and 3rd shot in the face when the masked man is clearly on side? And then the government calls that masked gunman very brave because the person in car was very clearly a terrorist. Welcome to fascism. End of another great empire has begun.
  - bananabiscuit 9mo ago
    You describe a very unfortunate situation, and it’s the reason why impersonating an officer is such a serious crime. In the case at hand, however, there is no mistaken identity. I think for there to be any chance for government officers to do their jobs, and for there to not be any pointless deaths, their authority should never be challenged in the streets, and if they do abuse that authority, the officer should be severely punished.

UncleMeat 9mo ago

Wait. Looking at the officer is a threat now?

bananabiscuit 9mo ago
This seems like an intentional misunderstanding to me, but I’ll clarify anyway: What I said was that she was looking directly at the officer while having her wheels pointed in his direction and accelerating hard (to the point that she lost traction). The looking detail is important because then you can’t claim she didn’t see the officer was in her way because she was still looking back from her reversing maneuver. It makes it more clear that she was intentionally trying to hit the officer with her car.
- UncleMeat 9mo ago
  I really have no idea how a human being can look at this video and not see a murder. I'm frightened of you.
  - bananabiscuit 9mo ago
    That’s interesting, because I’m actually also frightened. But the thing that scares me is how quick everyone wants to jump to conclusions as long as it supports their existing world view.
    - luke5441 9mo ago
      It's not about a world view. It is about watching a video and seeing what is happening. Unless you mean "world view" is my knowledge about how cars and guns work.
      - bananabiscuit 9mo ago
        I watched the video and I saw Renee attempt to hit the ICE agent with her car. After doing that, lethal force is unfortunately on the table. The officer doesn’t have time after that to wait and see if she is going to try to kill him again or not.

metaphysicalyes 9mo ago

First shot is a red herring. It might be legal in the US to shoot the driver trying to hit you when are already out of the vehicle's way. The more condemnatory are the 2nd and 3rd shot from the side window. This is pure cruelty and disregard of human life which in a parallel universe could be one of your family member. Anyone justifying this deserves no sympathy from rest of the human populace.

bananabiscuit 9mo ago
Once the officer sees that Renee attempted to hit him with her car, he (tragically indeed) has the right to use lethal force. When somebody tries to kill you, I don’t think it’s reasonable to (in that same split second) give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe they won’t try to immediately kill you or one of your partners again.
- empath75 9mo ago
  Have you stopped to consider how you got to the point that you are defending this. Like, I get sort of working this over in your mind to yourself, but you have gone out of your way to excuse a cop gunning down a mom that just dropped off her kid at school. She had stuffed animals sitting in her dashboard. Her kid is an orphan. You didn't have to do this. You could have just stayed silent. Now you're the guy that is going to defend secret police murdering people in broad daylight.
  - metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
    I have been curious about this as well. So far what I have discovered, for a significant section, it is schadenfreude borne out of their past injustice. It roughly translates to: nobody was on my side when I was kicked down and this is my moment to rejoice where others like the victim do not have privilege to human dignity either and therefore assuaging the previous resentful assumptions to the contrary.
  - bananabiscuit 9mo ago
    I think this situation is very tragic, and I wish it had not happened. The reason I am taking this stance, is because I think that, unless they are fine with becoming a martyr, people should not go and mess with government officers in the streets. Yeah, I know: “victim blaming”, but there is a difference between officers descending upon a blameless victim vs. you going out looking to make trouble with authority. Even in the first case, the right thing to do (if you value your life) is to comply with the instructions (even if illegal) and challenge them in court later.

luke5441 9mo ago

I'm getting really depressed here that people watch those videos and actually think this was not murder. It's like they live in a different reality or something.

zahlman 9mo ago
Please explain what you think the word "murder" means, first. Then please explain your understanding of the law, with regards to the circumstances under which LEO are permitted to use their weapons. Then please watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDda-L_ZOE8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDda-L_ZOE8 and cite at least one point of disagreement with the legal argument presented, on any objective grounds (factual or legal).