Anonymous #2 5w

Huh???

23

Anonymous #2 5w

girl what

21

Anonymous #1 5w

“colored”? in the big 26? 😭😭😭😭

137

Anonymous #5 5w

girl bye i’m colored too what abt it

54

Anonymous #3 5w

If she was black they’d be rioting like George Floyd. Because she is white, they won’t.

9

Anonymous #1 5w

Who said we were okay with murder…

-15

Anonymous #2 5w

Why does it matter???

10

Anonymous #3 5w

i know you’re grown enough to get my point don’t start.

16

Anonymous #2 5w

the opposite actually…

20

Anonymous #1 5w

Brutha… you’re the one saying “colored” so how about you don’t start

11

Anonymous #6 5w

no way you’re defending ts

33

Anonymous #1 5w

No way ur defending someone that tried to hit someone with a car and didn’t comply 😭😭

-7

Anonymous #5 5w

Because that’s what happened you moron

8

Anonymous #8 5w

god i love when the reply proves my comment.

32

Anonymous #3 5w

how about you tighten up all mad about words in the “big 26” grown ass woman

12

Anonymous #9 5w

literally execution

45

Anonymous #1 5w

How?

14

Anonymous #8 5w

U just proved his point 😂

11

Seek help and seek God 😂

0

Anonymous #3 5w

It doesn’t I’m just saying the truth for all the white girls to see this who think they can be allies

8

Anonymous #9 5w

he looks out the way to me

48

Anonymous #7 5w

very off to the side

28

Anonymous #6 5w

She literally drove in the other direction bruh

15

Anonymous #6 5w

you’re insane

9

Anonymous #6 5w

no way you’re parroting some politician’s story without actually watching the video… she didn’t hit anyone with her car, and there wouldn’t be anyone in the way of being remotely injured by her car if she wasn’t being unlawfully detained. she had no obligation to comply with a group who can only detain people in limited ways when they have a warrant.

8

Anonymous #1 5w

Cry. Sorry I’m logical

4

Anonymous #1 5w

No way you’re defending someone who tried to run a cop over

6

Anonymous #12 5w

i’m a her, my love, but it’s all good lmao

19

Anonymous #10 5w

https://x.com/LandoBerando/status/2009113983039754678/photo/1 She did not Drive in the other direction her tires start spinning forward while pointing at the agent before any shots rang out

6

Anonymous #14 5w

It’s called self defense she drove her car directly at law enforcement which gives law enforcement the right to use deadly force as you can see from the outcomes of many court cases in US history

-2

Anonymous #11 5w

Bingo

32

Anonymous #2 5w

You sound stupid

1

Anonymous #13 5w

“self defense”.. soo simply because she drove her car forward not allowing “ these law enforcement” inside her car he has the right to shit her not ONCE but THREE times when he decided to be right in front of HER personal VEHICLE?!

3

Anonymous #13 5w

none of us can know her intentions, but the entire situation would have been avoided if ice was doing their job and not detaining random civilians. you can’t click links from here, but not sure why we’re getting our news from some rando lando berando on a social media app.

18

Anonymous #2 5w

aren’t they protest for her i’m confused..

4

Anonymous #7 5w

Yeah you can’t drive a +2 ton vehicle at law enforcement… Google it… anyone else who’s done that in the past was shot, Also she was given lawful commands to exit her vehicle after she had committed multiple felonies

18

Anonymous #13 5w

not you trying to prove something by linking a tweet from a self admitted red piller lmao. the video LITERALLY shows her trying to back up and move AWAY. trying to gaslight people into seeing something different is CRAZY work.

9

Anonymous #7 5w

What’s wrong with protests?

9

Anonymous #13 5w

multiple felonies … like what?!

6

Anonymous #15 5w

💯

14

Anonymous #3 5w

ohhhh chile- the comment confused th outta me don’t mind that comment

8

Anonymous #13 5w

ice does not have the authority to make that type of “lawful command” against someone or detain anyone unless they have a warrant signed by a judge. putting their body or anything else in the way of her car moving in the first place was the first unlawful act.

9

Anonymous #1 5w

You tighten up and respect this innocent woman who just fucking did you cunt

0

Anonymous #13 5w

they’re CUSTOMS not the state police ffs

11

Anonymous #1 5w

She not defending it it just the truth, have you seen the video yourself?

3

Anonymous #14 5w

Her intentions don’t matter in this situation, the reality is her tires spun forward while pointing directly at law enforcement, anyone who’s done that in the past has also gotten the same lethal force enacted upon them

11

Anonymous #5 5w

That’s literally a link to the car driving forward at the agent you moron open the link

3

Anonymous #14 5w

No true, ICE agents are federal officers. LEARN THE LAW

6

Anonymous #13 5w

also idgaf what your google ai summary slop says; regular police officers (not customs) have dodged cars plenty of times when they (not customs) could have made the snap judgement to shoot someone. maybe when someone’s wheels start spinning, move your ass out of the way?

1

Anonymous #13 5w

EXACTLY!! They are just mad because it’s ICE and the propaganda they are making use see them as

7

Anonymous #15 5w

if it was anybody this would be talked about.. at this point in time it just soo happens to be dumbass ice agents

8

Anonymous #14 5w

Law enforcement doesn’t have to dodge and forget that you tried to kill then hope this helps 👍

5

Anonymous #5 5w

Where was we trying to back up? She came towards the officer. And before she was trying to move away they told her to get out the car and she tried to flee and in the attempt to do so almost ran over a guard

6

Anonymous #14 5w

They were not detaining random civilians omg do you guys not know the Law? We could all sue right now if that was EVER the case. She was literally obstructing justice by trying to block them from going into the street

1

Anonymous #15 5w

they’re not above the law bc the federal government is their boss? being federal officers doesn’t mean they can arrest anyone for anything?

0

Anonymous #14 5w

The law says if you drive a +2 ton car at law enforcement they can use lethal force as you used lethal force first, hope this helps 👍

10

Anonymous #10 5w

She literally drove forward before any shots rang out. She tried to run him over

4

Anonymous #13 5w

you are the one who said “tried to.” if her intentions don’t matter, she did not hit anyone with her car, period

1

Anonymous #14 5w

Yeah she was driving the car and it drove towards law enforcement, maybe she didn’t mean to but she still did it, no le in the heat of the moment while being hit by a car is thinking “is she meaning to hit me with her car or is this an accident”

1

Anonymous #14 5w

They are still federal officers? Your point?

3

Anonymous #13 5w

the law in minnesota specifically also says if someone approaches you with a firearm and you feel threatened, you can use lethal force to evade them, and these specific individuals were acting outside of the limits of their law enforcement abilities, so they would be treated as anybody approaching you with a firearm.

1

Anonymous #14 5w

I don’t know what laws you have read but everything you have said is false. ICE are federal officers, if they ask you to move, YOU MOVE. If you don’t you obstructing justice but getting in the way of their task. They absolutely CAN arrest you or detain you when you interfere with they investigation

13

Anonymous #14 5w

If law enforcement approaches you, yo can’t use lethal force lol

9

Anonymous #13 5w

source for customs and not police specifically?

5

Anonymous #7 5w

She was following federal agents and impeding them “all day” per the report, the ICE agents let her get too comfortable she should have been arrested far earlier in the day and she wouldn’t have been shot

15

Anonymous #15 5w

sources?

5

Anonymous #7 5w

You are exactly right. Are you not custom to the US laws? If you watched the video she forwarded her car at the agent after they told her to get out and she attempted to flee…AND THIS WAS BEFORE SHOTS RAN OUT. Did you watch the video?

12

Anonymous #7 5w

And you’re saying “so simply because she drove her car toward not allowing” THAT IS A CRIME AND FELONY. Are you listening to yourself?

10

Anonymous #13 5w

per the report written by the people not trying to get in trouble for just having murdered someone? are you new?

4

Anonymous #13 5w

“should’ve been arrested and she wouldn’t have been shot” - same shit everyone says yet it always ends in a fucking shot.. please be so serious right

9

Anonymous #10 5w

Omggg please get the fuck on with that

16

Anonymous #17 5w

we asked you for the specific codification of the things you were claiming were the law not a pr statement of the feds trying to cover their own asses

9

Anonymous #5 5w

What you’re saying doesn’t make sense. But what you’re describing is literally why happened…

-2

Anonymous #15 5w

there is a higher burden on law enforcement than the average citizen to know and follow the law; how about “they should not have positioned their body in a way to illegally detain someone” BEFORE you even end up at “she should have allowed herself to be illegally arrested”

3

Anonymous #9 5w

All shots were already fired at the point of your screenshot

13

Anonymous #7 5w

Well maybe she shouldn’t have drove forward into a federal agent after being given lawful commands to exit her vehicle…

7

Anonymous #9 5w

This was after the shots were fired

2

Anonymous #1 5w

Don’t run over someone with cars?

13

Anonymous #3 5w

Not innocent trying to run over someone

0

Anonymous #5 5w

Not pro ice she literally did attempt to run someone over

-6

Anonymous #3 5w

She committed multiple felonies lol fuck you mean “innocent” 😂

11

Anonymous #9 5w

After he moved out of the way show the full thing now

10

Anonymous #13 5w

it’s not a lawful command. ice does not have that power unless they have a federal warrant. i don’t know how i can simplify this for you any more; you’re just going to have to rub both of your brain cells together as hard as you can until you come up with enough energy to look it up somewhere reputable (not twitter).

0

Anonymous #7 5w

You didn’t care then why’s it all of a sudden an issue

1

Anonymous #7 5w

Forward with someone in front

3

Anonymous #14 5w

ICE are considered police any lawful commands they give carry the same wait as police

7

It’s not that hard to understand

1

Anonymous #14 5w

You clearly are not custom to US laws

12

Anonymous #15 5w

They still can make lawful arrests

11

Anonymous #18 5w

Bingo and if you try to run them over when they try to make said arrest they can then shoot you

9

Anonymous #14 5w

There is a higher burden of law you are right, that’s why they gave her opportunities to leave, get out of her car, and stand down. She chose to do none of that…

4

Anonymous #14 5w

You didnt ask for anything lol that was 17’s first post

0

Anonymous #14 5w

Again ICE are federal officers just like detectives can still make arrests

9

Anonymous #14 5w

Never said they are above the law, they LITERALLY ARE THE LAW

6

Anonymous #14 5w

If you are obstructing and getting in the way of an investigation they absolutely can, look up the law

1

Anonymous #15 5w

most detectives are not federal officers?? and i guess we’ll just have to see their warrant for reasonable suspicion she crossed the border illegally in court, because that is the entire breadth of their jurisdiction. they do NOT have the same rights as police and can’t just go around detaining people.

2

Anonymous #14 5w

You don’t need a warrant to defend yourself from someone who drove a car at you, hope this helps 👍

1

Anonymous #14 5w

If you are a detective, you are a federal officer. If you work for the GOVERNMENT and are able to have a GUN you are…say it with me…A FEDERAL OFFICER🎉🎉 if someone is preventing you from doing you job by blocking you, or anything of the sort…they can arrest you.

10

Anonymous #15 5w

i did, and it said they do not need always need a judicial warrant, just in most cases, so i apologize for that mistake, but even the ice website itself says they can only detain people without a warrant if they themselves are suspected to have crossed the border illegally.

1

Anonymous #14 5w

The government website? The American laws and statues? You can google this up as well and will see it on .gov websites…

2

Anonymous #14 5w

Any law enforcement agency can detain in cases of alleged law violations, depends on their departments policy

5

Anonymous #15 5w

they are the immigration and customs law. as it pertains to the us borders only. if you’re not coming, going, or staying illegally, they hand off your case to other law enforcement. maybe their witness testimony would have greater weight in court bc they have some of the training other leis do, but they do not have the right to enforce anything that doesn’t directly involve someone’s right to be in the country.

-1

Anonymous #18 5w

i’m telling you their department’s policy is that they can’t, and having lived in dc with all the different types of special police, that is definitely not true. they can follow someone until the next leis arrive but not detain them; just ride the metro in dc, and you’ll see it happen in real time.

9

Anonymous #13 5w

ICE aren’t law enforcement so…

33

Anonymous #14 5w

If you are interfering with their immigration and customs work (like how everyone is saying block ice and actually doing it) they can arrest you because they are federal officers FIRST

10

Anonymous #14 5w

Please read the law pertaining to what you just said, even use ai if you will

3

Anonymous #15 5w

i’m not using ai, and even ice.gov is careful about stating that they can detain anyone they suspect to be here illegally and nothing about obstruction.

0

Anonymous #14 5w

Okay good don’t use sin and go read the federal laws yourself. Go read how you have to pledge to being an OFFICER first

1

Anonymous #13 5w

if she committed a crime she should have been arrested. not murdered.

34

Anonymous #22 5w

Yeah they tried to arrest her, and then she drove towards and officer and hit him with her car, that gave them the right to use lethal force mind you AFTER she used lethal force first

15

Anonymous #15 5w

i’m telling you i just did, and with the source with the greatest bias being toward ice (themselves) even they qualify that someone suspected to have entered the country illegally can be detained, but conveniently say nothing about interfering with investigations, and i have found other sources that say interfering is not enough. being an officer of THE law does not make you an officer of EVERY law, and each department has limitations for many good reasons, not the least of […]

-2

Anonymous #13 5w

She actually hit him? Please find a reputable news source stating this and a clip from the video. Not a new source where the officers are covering their asses, nor a PSA about what she did wrong and a smear campaign on how she deserved this - actual concrete evidence. Because she should not had been killed. She tried to abscond and the officer should have and definitely could have moved. But he didn’t. Then he killed her.

34

Anonymous #14 5w

[…] which being the checks and balances system upon which this country was founded. by thinking you’re doing the patriotic thing and standing up for some lei who stepped in front of a car they shouldn’t (who is, may i remind you, not the person who lost their life in this situation), you’re really allowing the current administration to bastardize the principles upon which this country was founded.

-1

Anonymous #4 5w

He went to the hospital for it but here’s a video of the car hitting and dragging the officer https://x.com/dvanlangenhove/status/2009227706718933223?s=46

-14

Anonymous #14 5w

ICE makes arrest, to make arrests you have to be a trained legal officer to do so, you have to go through the training of an officer….how is this not clicking yet??? They working in a different sector of policing but they are still federal officers😭

1

Anonymous #13 5w

they were yelling at her to leave and then shot her as she was trying to leave 😭

14

Anonymous #25 5w

No they weren’t they were telling her to get out of the car listen to the audio again

10

Anonymous #15 5w

“detectives” include state and local police detectives and non-lei private investigators, not sure what that specific tangent is about or has to do with anything?

-1

Anonymous #19 5w

US law says they are law enforcement so…

9

Anonymous #14 5w

What is the CIA???? What is the FBI????? Please get the fuck on as well, you’re trying to validate a point that has no basis or foundation and that simply isn’t true. Good day

1

Anonymous #15 5w

customs training is different from police training which is different from fbi training which is different from national guard training. customs can enforce different laws than fbi who can enforce different laws than police who can enforce different laws than the national guard. some of those laws overlap in some instances, but the laws customs agents are allowed to enforce are limited directly to crimes committed in the act of crossing the border or staying in the country longer than allowed.

-2

Anonymous #27 5w

ICE are legally considered police so there’s really no difference

3

Anonymous #14 5w

Is just different levels of authority…you do know that right? Each sector has a higher level of authority then the other but they all still follow the same basic rules that apply to them and us as well….please…get the fuck on

3

Anonymous #13 5w

Exactly, these liberals are unhinged nowadays.

8

Anonymous #15 5w

those are different federal agencies than customs that have many types of employees, but i actually don’t think as high of a percentage of all those employees are detectives as in state police agencies. a “detective” is just a title within an agency that may be federal, state, or neither.

0

Anonymous #13 5w

I'll be so honest with you. Yeah maybe she should have complied with government workers telling her to get out of her car but I totally get why she didn't. They were yelling at her not telling her why and the guy tried to rip her door open. All men in masks (I don't think any government workers should be wearing a fucking mask) and after seeing what Ice has been doing to people lately using excessive force and detaining citizens who committed no crime, I'd be scared too. Also according to

40

Anonymous #28 5w

Guidelines used yo train ice and law enforcement, lethal force is NOT allowed to be used on someone fleeing a scene. Which is exactly what hat happened in the video. He realized she was going to drive away so he shot her in the face. That's crazy. He should go to prison. And when a doctor who witnessed it asked if he could go check her pulse and provide medical attention they said no. That's disgusting and wrong. For that alone all of them should receive jail time

49

Anonymous #28 5w

If they are trying to detain you and you try to flee they can. She literally had committed multiple felonies

-7

Anonymous #15 5w

what felonies and when?

10

Anonymous #13 5w

the agent stepped in front of her car as she was driving away

21

Anonymous #15 5w

that’s very easily proven untrue or there wouldn’t be people whose entire jobs are being the liaisons between law enforcement agencies???

1

Anonymous #14 5w

Obstructing a federal officer, assault on a federal officer, attempted murder of a federal officer, fleeing or evading law enforcement and what state laws Minnesota has for situations like these if she was to live.

6

Anonymous #29 5w

She was told to get out because she was under arrest, at that point she was at a traffic stop, the agent can stand infront of her car if he wants

13

Anonymous #28 5w

You clearly don’t know the law otherwise you’d know that deadly force can’t be used on someone WITHOUT a deadly weapon. Say it again for the slow liberals in the back: WITHOUT a deadly weapon. Huh, I wonder what a TWO TON vehicle is considered as when someone is fleeing. A WEAPON. Therefore it was LEGALLY justified. From a moral standpoint, it could be seen as a murder, but don’t expect any charges.

23

Anonymous #29 5w

And cars are supposed to yield to pedestrians

5

Anonymous #27 5w

Can’t believe you really got on hear and started talking about something you have no understanding of.

12

Anonymous #18 5w

They won’t cause they know they’re wrong. None of these people beliefs are based in reality.

3

Anonymous #21 5w

This is very false. Many peaceful protests have turned violent at hands of police, national guard, any government figures harassing, detaining, arresting, and getting violent with peaceful protestors. It’s peaceful for civilians and government forces make it risky for the lives of innocent people. Peaceful protestors are killed often.

9

Anonymous #14 5w

Because there are different levels of authorities….

1

Anonymous #4 5w

This is probably directly towards the middle class white populous who have zero empathy for others

112

Anonymous #30 5w

I asked my middle class white friend and she wasn’t okay with it either 🤯

63

Anonymous #14 5w

lol okay

1

Anonymous #4 5w

Why would you hit the gas in first place if you see anyone in front of the car? Your reasoning fails under the most basic logic. I would’ve shot her too, tryna run me over.

0

Anonymous #27 5w

My logic prevails because only trigger-happy morons get in front of a car of someone that they “fear with their lives” and think “I’m going to shoot them” instead of “I’m going to move now in case they hit me”

5

Anonymous #15 5w

Right we been known this. Obviously it was a white women who got shot for this. Blacks get told from a young age hand on the wheel and car off. No exceptions or the result might literally be death. She fafo and that’s on her.

8

Anonymous #27 5w

No exceptions! And you only got one time

10

Anonymous #32 5w

They’re all like this :/

6

Anonymous #4 5w

I know that but clearly this person was 10 times as awful 😭

4

Anonymous #15 5w

No they can't. Lethal force is only allowed when the officers themselves are being threatened or the person is threatening other innocent bystanders. You can NOT murder someone because they are running. The correct response would be to get in the car and do a traditional car chase not fucking murder her

12

Anonymous #28 5w

A moving vehicle is a weapon and she attempted to run him over this is justified self defense

1

Anonymous #25 5w

She attempted to run him over while leaving quit making excuses

10

Anonymous #28 5w

So stupid it honestly sad. Please, do research.

-2

Anonymous #18 5w

When he shot her she was driving AWAY from them and they were all behind the car. Even still they are now allowed to use lethal force

7

Anonymous #28 5w

She ran him over it was justified

1

Anonymous #28 5w

Self defense she attempts to run him over

0

Anonymous #33 5w

Maybe let’s not normalize running people over then.

0

Anonymous #33 5w

If someone attempts to run you over with a car you just gonna let them?

2

Anonymous #18 5w

🎲

1

Anonymous #13 5w

This is actually not true according to DOJ 1-16.200 - USE OF DEADLY FORCE AND PROHIBITED RESTRAINT TECHNIQUES

0

Anonymous #28 5w

Don’t run people over it’s self defense

0

Anonymous #11 5w

Not when he shot her she wa arriving AWAY with them behind her car

-2

Anonymous #18 5w

Right? And let them continue to possibly run over others? No, while harsh he did what he had to.

0

Anonymous #27 5w

They could blocked the car or put traps or anything 3 point blank shots while another officer is trying to pry a door down is pathetic and you know it

3

Anonymous #28 5w

What ai video did you watch. We all saw him barely get out the way.

11

Anonymous #33 5w

Don’t run people over

0

Anonymous #18 5w

He literally stepped out of the way

3

Anonymous #18 5w

Don’t stand in front of a car

4

Anonymous #18 5w

She was driving away without any of them in front of her car when he shot her in the face in that moment he realized she was fleeing and actually going to be able to leave the scene he shot her to keep her from getting away because her driving away was not a threat to his safety

5

Anonymous #33 5w

After she hit him, yo wanna reenact it stand in the road trip

0

Anonymous #33 5w

Because she is1. Blocking traffic and two tried running someone over. Her fault.

0

Anonymous #14 5w

They’re law enforcement officer genius thy have the ability to enforce laws like any other agency

1

Anonymous #27 5w

And they are trained to surround a car btw

0

Anonymous #27 5w

I'm wondering what research you did because I watched the video, listened to former law enforcement officers analyze the video and talk about training for incidents like this and read the policies and procedures from the department of justice on the lethal use of force and when it is appropriate

4

Anonymous #18 5w

Why don’t you become a cope with the fact that ice shouldn’t even be there in the first place and that her death is a direct result of morons in law enforcement

6

Anonymous #27 5w

Fleeing is not the same as trying to hit someone with the car. Again " Firearms may not be discharged solely to disable moving vehicles. Specifically, firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless: (1) a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person with deadly force by means other than the vehicle" via DOJ

9

Anonymous #33 5w

No it was her actions that caused it she had no reason to interfere with lawful arrests then to try and run someone over, if you stand in the road and someone runs you over do you support them?

1

Anonymous #28 5w

No you didn’t because with just a little research your whole point falls apart. It only takes two facts. 1. ICE is allowed to make traffic stops. 2. Fleeing in a car IS fleeing with a deadly weapon and can be stopped with lethal force. Happens to black people all the time

-1

Anonymous #27 5w

The department of Justice says that a vehicle unless being used to drive into someone is not a lethal weapon. And you can say she tried to run them over but when he shot her she was driving away not towards him and those are just the facts of the video which cannot be argued

8

Anonymous #28 5w

Here you go again not knowing what you’re talking about, you can’t run someone over and become a threat

0

Anonymous #28 5w

She hit him first genius quit trying to spin the story, she became a threat the second she hit him

0

Anonymous #27 5w

I never identified my political standing either. I said she probably should have stopped the car when they told her to. But also that she shouldn't have been murder for fleeing because that doesn't comply with federal acceptable use of lethal force. Lmk why that is related to a political party. I mean sure everything is political but I didn't say anything about candidates or parties here

9

Anonymous #18 5w

Ain’t no point. #28 represents people who see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear. There is NO reasoning with them. These are the same people who cheered Charlie Kirk murder.

3

Anonymous #18 5w

She was fleeing when she was shot. The car was driving away from them both towards so she was not a threat to them physically by driving away although so was evading them which is wrong

2

Anonymous #28 5w

She ran him over which led to him stopping the threat she could have ran over other people like him quit making excuses she’s was a threat and was taken down

4

Anonymous #28 5w

If she wouldn’t have ran him over and complied with lawful orders it wouldn’t have happened

-1

Anonymous #18 5w

Any unbiased court won’t charge him. I can understand the humanitarian pov tho.

2

Anonymous #27 5w

I do not cheer on Charlie Kirk getting murdered bro. You don't know anything about my politics. If someone can show me a video or evidence that shows something otherwise I'm happy to change my perspective and say I was wrong but I'm just not seeing that right now

0

Anonymous #34 5w

This is a blatant lie as there would be riots and looting if it was another race

1

Anonymous #34 5w

Are you delusional or do you not remember when the city nearly burned down after George Fentanyl Floyd?

2

Anonymous #28 5w

Clearly you’re not when people are proving you wrong and you can’t accept facts

0

Anonymous #18 5w

You’re most likely white so idgaf abt your opinion

0

Anonymous #18 5w

Don’t even try. Not worth it

5

Anonymous #34 5w

Oh look and now you’re racist, its facts you can shove your bs opinion

3

Anonymous #34 5w

Now how would that be perceived if a white person said that to a POC

4

Anonymous #27 5w

Yeah Ice can legally make traffic stops. . . Never disagreed with that but what I'm saying is that according to DOJ a car is not inherently a deadly weapon. It's a deadly weapon only if it is used as such. And although she should have gotten out of the car when they told her to she was not using the car as a deadly weapon when she was shot

3

Anonymous #18 5w

It was never proven that George Floyd had any drugs in his system

4

Anonymous #27 5w

I never said anything about Floyd, but there was an autopsy that confirmed presence of it

0

Anonymous #18 5w

Can’t be racist towards whites when yall invented slavery

1

Anonymous #34 5w

Every race has been enslaved or treated inhuman at some points, thanks for acknowledging that your a racist hope you get help soon

0

Anonymous #28 5w

The moment you flee with a car recklessly, you become a felon and the car is now a deadly weapon. No if , buts, and ands about it. What aren’t you getting?

4

Anonymous #18 5w

No there wasn’t. Ever. That’s a lie.

5

Anonymous #18 5w

Say that shit with ur chest racist bitch not behind a screen

4

Anonymous #18 5w

And I don’t recall whites ever being slaves.

4

Anonymous #30 5w

bro my middle class white women friends are the most liberal people know

51

Anonymous twirling_tornado 5w

Right?!

11

Anonymous #32 5w

Or maybe a normal person who didn’t consent to being ran over.

0

Anonymous #9 5w

ok im not on their side but lets not post screenshots completely out of context bc this was right after she had already been shot from a much more forward facing angle, and his arm was just still up as the car turned to the side afterwards, if u watch the video

3

Anonymous #27 5w

she was turning right while he was on the left side of her vehicle. her wheels were not even turned towards him. are you stupid?

1

Anonymous #37 5w

Refer to previous comment please.

5

Anonymous #2 5w

What actions are you calling riots??

1

Anonymous #27 5w

No need, there’s no context or intellectual conversation with you people. Trump lied about him being admitted to the hospital and injured. The police chief even said the only person who was injured at all was the woman who got shot and killed. What do you have to say about the video that showed a physician on the scene asking to check her pulse and administer treatment to her, where the ICE agent said no?

9

Anonymous #27 5w

Police and ICE agents have the legal authority to control a scene when there is still an active threat and medical attention is promptly being administered, HOWEVER, there was no longer a “threat” and emergency services did not get there until fifteen minutes after she had been shot three times. Meaning they let her bleed out for 15 minutes. That is a civil rights issue.

5

Anonymous #18 4w

are you dumb

2

Anonymous #13 4w

you’re so brainwashed it’s disgusting. since you’ve “watched the video” i’d like to recommend you get your eyes checked out as thy are clearly not working.

1

Anonymous sticky_paddle34 4w

Think about what you said for a minute…..Then, take your emotions out of the picture; I’m sure this will be hard for you. Then read the job description of an ice agent. Why is it that so many of you have no clue what you’re talking about? Come on people. Nine times out of ten, you can logically find your answer.

0

Anonymous #13 4w

My favorite reputable news source is a random account on twitter

16

Anonymous #42 4w

The SpongeBob fish news guy on tiktok

5

Anonymous #34 4w

No, if it was a woman of color, liberal thugs all over the country would be occupying businesses and looting like animals at a zoo.

-4

Anonymous #31 4w

Bro is just piecing random words together “liberal thug”. Next we’ll get the conservative Yakuza and the non partisan mafia

8

Anonymous #37 4w

Exactly not a legal one. Which is why he won’t be charged. It’s morally wrong not legally. People can’t tell the difference.

3

Anonymous #13 4w

The officer was not dragged, he walked off the scene. The car didn’t even start flooring it until after the woman was shot, causing the car to crash a few feet ahead. The DRIVER was INCAPACITATED by the time the car sped away. The officer fired one shot into the front windshield of the vehicle and then an ADDITIONAL TWO SHOTS INTO THE OPEN WINDOW OF THE DRIVERS SIDE. He couldn’t have just shot the tires ? IT WAS MURDER. If he were dragged he wouldn’t have been able to walk off so swiftly.

9

Anonymous #43 4w

The fact that the additional two shots were shot from the side shows he was at an angle that was beside the car at one point

1

Anonymous #27 4w

federal guidelines state that deadly force with a firearm is not permitted when reasonable alternatives exist, such as stepping out of the way of the vehicle. those same guidelines also state that there must be a threat beyond the vehicle itself. their use of a firearm was an unjustified and disgusting misuse of force. that agent murdered an innocent mother in cold blood because she wouldn't listen to unidentified, armed, masked secret police trying to illegally drag her from her vehicle

6

Anonymous #27 4w

That is not how it works. Lethal force is authorized when there is an imminent threat. Reckless flight from a scene does not fall under imminent threat. Fleeing a scene does not make your vehicle a deadly weapon. I think 28 is confused because you appeared to be arguing your feelings, while 28 is telling you what the law says. And 28 is correct about the law, you are not

8

Anonymous #47 4w

those agents tried to kidnap her and she responded in a perfectly reasonable way; fleeing. if they felt she was in violation of the law they should've followed proper procedures, put a BOLO out and followed her to where they could make an arrest - or got a warrant and served an arrest that way this was an execution armed gestapo executed an innocent mother

11

Anonymous #47 4w

Fleeing was definitely not the way to go, but I agree on the fact they should’ve pressed charges later

7

Anonymous #47 4w

No it wasn’t. But I’m not going to waste time arguing with with people who compare ICE to Gestapo. That’s honestly embarrassing and insulting that you would say something like that.

8

Anonymous #27 4w

And if you knew how many blacks have been shot by police for the same EXACT thing you wouldn’t be saying all this bullshit bout legality. Or maybe you would, maybe it only bothers you when it’s a white women. Idk

8

Anonymous #13 4w

Saying you can be legally shot if you try to run over law enforcement is an oversimplification. Imminent threat is required to use deadly force. Recklessly fleeing the scene does not fall under imminent threat. The officer will be tried guilty based on whether a reasonable officer had no viable alternative to avoid the imminent threat of death or severe bodily injury. The officer was not trapped, there was lateral escape, the vehicle was rolling at a low speed, and the officer chose to fire

1

Anonymous #48 4w

Instead of disengage. You’re allowed to disagree, but use the law as justification for your opinion when the law doesn’t agree.

1

Anonymous #27 4w

I am unconcerned with who you are or what your opinion is. I am concerned with poor reasoning and false information.

9

Anonymous #48 4w

Sure. Even though your reasoning is so ass a child could see through it.

6

Anonymous #18 4w

lol wake up and stop falling for Fox News propaganda. Watch the video. Watch how they approached her vehicle. She wasn’t trying to kill anyone

3

Anonymous #27 4w

Insults are often a concession and aim to reassert control. You have nothing else to say here. If you did, you would provide an example of my poor reasoning. Would it help you if I told you I was on your red team? That I also called out the bullshit of the left for cheering on Kirk’s murder?

1

Anonymous #27 4w

tf r u yapping about? i'm black. i'm in another post talking about the fixation with white victims as we speak. you just have nothing to say because at the end of the day federal guidelines explicitly forbid this type of response from federal law enforcement regardless, i accept your concession. you're just talking out of your ass and you're all out of steam

1

Anonymous #27 4w

"so insulting to call them gestapo!" girl these are unidentified, masked men with guns trying to drag innocent mothers out of cars for daring to oppose their mission of anonymously kidnapping people including CITIZENS and just got approval from SCOTUS that they can use race/ethnicity as a basis for detainment. call them whatever you want - they're thugs and goons

1

Anonymous #47 4w

There is no federal guidelines that have ever said such a thing and the fact that you’re willing lie about it to prove a point says you can’t be reasoned with.

-1

Anonymous #27 4w

And if you knew what he gestapo actually did you’d know that that comparison makes no sense. The fact that you’re able post that says they’re not gestapo. Potentially dangerous Bullies yes, Gestapo not even close.

-1

Anonymous #30 4w

i’m a middle class white woman and think ice need to get the f out

16

Anonymous #51 4w

I don’t think that’s what happened

3

Anonymous #15 4w

What assault? Clearly the multiple povs of the murder would show an agent on the ground?

2

Anonymous twirling_tornado 4w

update just saw clip angles from the other side and nah she def hit him with her car and he got out of the way last second after shooting from the front

-1

Anonymous twirling_tornado 4w

So she should’ve been shot?

3

Anonymous twirling_tornado 4w

Dude I’ve seen the video, she was tiring away from the “cop”

4

Anonymous #13 4w

please rewatch the video(s). she reversed so she WOULDN’T hit him and in fact did NOT drag the officer. you can clearly see the officer get out of the way and stand parallel with the one of the officers on the left

5

Anonymous #9 4w

You intentionally used this still shot to control your narrative. In this view, both shots were already fired. Remember an important term. One you clearly have no clue about; “totality of the circumstances.” Hopefully you’re not majoring in Criminal Justice.

11

Anonymous #53 4w

she shouldn’t have been shot. but from the other pov, i can understand why he shot her

3

Anonymous #53 4w

also the ice agent who shot her had previously been dragged 300 feet across the ground by a different car and had to get 33 stitches. so he was probably slightly traumatized from that as well

2

Anonymous #54 4w

the video so clearly shows her avoiding them. first she backs away to angle herself away, then accelerates in a slow turn away from them, then takes off once everybody is clear. that "agent" is a murderer plain and simple

6

Anonymous twirling_tornado 4w

Poor ICE agent got a boo-boo and had to execute a mother to make it feel better. I get it, I’ve been there a couple times in my life, it really does help.

1

Anonymous everlastingmobstarter 4w

It does indeed

2

Anonymous #14 4w

The car was stopped. She drove forward with the intent to run him over, thereby attempting vehicular manslaughter, giving the man, even if he was simply a regular citizen, the right to use lethal force in self defense. It is utterly stupid to argue he wasn’t within his rights to kill her

1

Anonymous #31 4w

I think that ice has changed recently. Masks, fake tactical gear, and more violent. Not the same job it was say 10 years ago

1

Anonymous #6 4w

What kind of fucked up god do you believe in?

6

Anonymous #47 4w

Thank you bro I was getting tired of this shit

1

Anonymous #57 4w

He also approached a car that was on from the front which is always a terrible idea, he shouldn’t be almost hit for it but he put himself in a situation that could’ve harmed him, the woman tried to flee which is also a terrible idea, one mishap to another causes big problems we shouldn’t be dividing people we should be coming together and finding ways to show our thoughts on the matter and listen to others

1

Anonymous #46 4w

from the justice manual on use of force: "DHS LEOs should also avoid intentionally and unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no alternative to using deadly force."

9

Anonymous #21 4w

Exactly

0

Anonymous #38 4w

Yea, she’s going it right….. you’re a Genius.

0

Anonymous #47 4w

Awesome I didn’t know it was in a manual just thought it was like common sense even more reason not to walk in front of a car

6

Anonymous #57 4w

she didn't hit him. i watched the video. if his past experiences make him so jumpy that he feel compelled to execute an innocent woman (which is what he did) he shouldn't be in a law enforcement role

3

Anonymous #47 4w

Doesnt excuse her actions. She definitely wasn’t innocent as you’re trying to portray her. They were both wrong. Quit with the propaganda

2

Anonymous #27 4w

This 🏅, both were wrong it’s unfortunate that we’re so quick to pull the trigger though

1

Anonymous #46 4w

Fr. I’m pretty sure he can’t be legally charged for that but from a moral standpoint he did too much.

3

Anonymous #46 4w

it should be common sense and they make it very clear to avoid doing things like that

6

Anonymous #27 4w

I don’t think he was technically in danger since he wasn’t actually being hit by the car, I don’t know how policies and laws work as I’m not an attorney but he should definitely have a consequence

3

Anonymous #46 4w

Well legally it probably a gray area cause facts are she did move the car while an agent was in front. Doesn’t matter bout her wheels, TECHNICALLY, he was right. We’ve seen actions like this before so it’s not a precedent. Unfortunately she is not alive so we’ll never know her intent. So far her intent seems to vary based on what political party is talking about it. This situation will leave a lot of people angry o matter what

0

Anonymous #27 4w

ever heard of the constitution? innocent until proven guilty? or is it innocent until an ICE officer tries to drag you from your car and sh00ts you in the skull as you flee in fear? yeah no i'm pretty sure it's innocent until proven guilty. she was never given the opportunity to defend herself in court because she was extrajudicially executed. she died an innocent woman. YOU stop with the propaganda

1

Anonymous #27 4w

"DHS LEOs should also avoid intentionally and unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no alternative to using deadly force."

1

Anonymous #47 4w

The proof was when her car attempted to run him over

-1

Anonymous #18 4w

several feet away actually

1

Anonymous #18 4w

also not a court of law

1

Anonymous #18 4w

that's his firearm aimed at her btw

1

Anonymous #47 4w

Funny how you fail to use the beginning of the video when he is in front of the vehicle and she speeds which leads him to move, thanks for trying to falsify facts

0

Anonymous #47 4w

She attempted to run him over and was a threat btw, you wanna stand in the road and reenact to see how you feel?

0

Anonymous #18 4w

several feet away from the car actually. this is the moment before he opens fire. he was clearly out of the path of the vehicle

1

Anonymous #47 4w

Again you fail to show the beginning of the video where she attempts to run him over, quit being misleading

0

Anonymous #18 4w

he was walking around the front. by the time she accelerated he's clear to the left. you're either being dishonest, unintelligent or both

1

Anonymous #18 4w

i also don't need to reenact because if i was an agent of the law i would follow the federal guidelines that say "DHS LEOs should also avoid intentionally and unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no alternative to using deadly force." such as stepping in the path of an actively fleeing vehicle

6

Anonymous #47 4w

And she started to drive when he was in front clearly you’re being bias and leaving out pertinent information to fit your narrative, cars are weapons

-2

Anonymous #47 4w

They stopped a person from being a threat with a deadly weapon, if she was fleeing she would be charged with that and btw people who flee don’t run others over first so use common sense

-2

Anonymous #47 4w

Again here you go not showing the full thing quit being bias to your bs narrative

-2

Anonymous #18 4w

common sense is not stepping in front of an active vehicle with a gun pointed at it, as is clearly referenced in the Justice Manual: "DHS LEOs should also avoid intentionally and unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no alternative to using deadly force."

7

Anonymous #18 4w

i can't post a video in comments. cope harder. she never tried to hit him. you're deranged and delusional

6

Anonymous #47 4w

Common sense is not running over people and obeying lawful orders in a stop, any btw people walk in front of cars all the time it was her fault she pushed the gas pedal, since you want to victim blame did you say the same when Floyd used a fake currency to pay

-1

Anonymous #18 4w

Probably

-2

Anonymous #47 4w

god i'm so sick of these dishonest troglodytes

3

Anonymous #27 4w

That’s so funny they blocked me because they knew they were wrong and couldn’t back up their bias opinions without facts

1

Anonymous #18 4w

Sad when people are so stuck in their ways they can’t hear anyone else or fathom that their wrong

6

Anonymous #27 4w

So funny when people don't realize they're being blocked because talking to them is worse than arguing with a brick wall. Y'all are dishonest, manipulative liars trying to deny the reality any reasonable person can see: She was fleeing and he murdered her for it

7

Anonymous #27 4w

i don't waste time entertaining bullshit claims with no evidence - especially when clear evidence to the contrary has already been provided

6

Anonymous #58 4w

She attempted to run him over and faced the consequences of her actions, quit trying to justify her faults with disinformation

0

Anonymous #32 4w

By running him over in front of her car, and she wasn’t even free to leave

0

Anonymous #18 4w

Officers shouldn’t approach cars from the front regardless, it’s not safe no matter the situation, she shouldn’t of fled but she definitely wasn’t trying to hit him hence why her car went right and down the road hitting another car and didn’t take the officer straight forward into a curb

8

Anonymous #18 4w

I'm so confused why you guys think she ran someone over. She didn't hit anyone

1

Anonymous #18 4w

The “running over” in question

0

Anonymous #18 4w

And then “boom”

0

Anonymous #30 4w

They're both on the side of her car and you can see her wheels pointed away from him here

1

Anonymous #30 4w

Mind you she also didn't hit him in this so I'd hardly call that "running over"

1

Anonymous #30 4w

And at the point his gun is drawn she's actually further away from him and driving away so she's not a threat of hitting him. He shot her to stop her from getting away which is against federal guidelines for apprehension of a fleeing suspect rather than in self defense that's my point

1

Anonymous #28 4w

I feel like drivers are safer and less likely to hit people when you don’t shoot at them

2

Anonymous #28 4w

They were fired already when she drove away it was self defense

0

Anonymous #38 4w

And they’re safer when you don’t attempt to run people over and comply

0

Anonymous #18 4w

Even if you believe that a car is a deadly weapon the DOJ says this would not count as a vehicle being used as a deadly weapon and the officer would be in the wrong because he used lethal force when he was not allowed to because her driving away is not considered using the car as a deadly weapon even tho she probably should have stopped

3

Anonymous #18 4w

They were fired as she was turning the vehicle away (aka turning away=not running people over=car not being used as a weapon=lethal force not allowed)

1

Anonymous #28 4w

This is a blatant lie as it is justified , she was detained and at a lawful stop she should not have fled not to mention hit someone it was self defense

1

Anonymous #18 4w

No one is arguing here that she shouldn't have complied with orders. At least I'm not but a suspect not complying with orders does not mean you can use deadly force according to federal guidelines. That was a trigger happy cop

1

Anonymous #28 4w

Correction ice officer I know they aren't cops

1

Anonymous #28 4w

It was deserved and yes he was within his rights to self defense

0

Anonymous #28 4w

Still law enforcement officer

0

Anonymous #28 4w

Running someone over with a car is a justified excuse to use firearm btw

0

Anonymous #18 4w

I haven't seen a video where she hit him. I saw one where they ran up to her car as she was trying to get away. Do you know where I can see the video you're talking about? I'd like to have all the information to fully form my opinion. Regardless a car fleeing a scene does not warrant lethal force according to the department of justice guidelines on use of deadly force

3

Anonymous #28 4w

It’s literally in the beginning of the video of most angles, and yes when a car is hitting a person it’s justified force, nothing to do with this fleeing bs

0

Anonymous #18 4w

I guess we just disagree on the running someone over part. I didn't see her actually hit anyone in the videos I saw

1

Anonymous #28 4w

If you actually watch the videos you’ll see it 👍

1

Anonymous #28 4w

Ignorance isn’t an excuse to the facts

1

Anonymous #18 4w

It's not bs. Is the federal guidelines on use of lethal force which is definitely relevant to this case. In the video I saw I can see one ice standing near the driver side door and one standing near the front tire but his shoes are clearly in the left side of the vehicle while she was turning towards her right so he was never in danger of being ran over in that moment as she was moving away from him not towards and he was not in front of the car but rather in the left side. If you can point me

6

Anonymous #18 4w

To the angle where it looks like he's being hit I'd be happy to watch that and make sure I have the right info

5

Anonymous #28 4w

It literally is you can’t run people over because you want to flee, in every video he is in the front of the car going around when he is in front she moves the vehicle forward which leads to him moving and discharging his weapon to stop the threat

0

Anonymous #28 4w

Literally watch every video it’s in the beginning as long as it’s not edited to start at the middle of the video

0

Anonymous #18 4w

I think the issue other commenters are having with you is more than you aren't providing any evidence to support your claims you're just basically back "no you're all wrong and dumb" which like, obviously that gets you nowhere

5

Anonymous #28 4w

There is evidence as in the beginning of the video he was in front of the car and she attempts to drive through, there is evidence people just don’t want to admit they’re wrong

0

Anonymous #18 4w

Well idk if I'm watching the same video as you since there are multiple angles of it which is why I asked if you could help me make sure we're seeing the same thing. He reaches for his gun while she was in the reverse from what I see in the video I saw. Reversing with no one behind her is also not deadly use of her vehicle as a weapon which would be necessary for him to use lethal force. Also although the movement of the car were short she wasn't going crazy fast or anything until after he shot

6

Anonymous #18 4w

Her in the face. They all could have moved away from the car if they actually felt she wanted to hit them. But I don't think that's why he shot her. I think he shot her because he didn't want her to drive away. Which is not an acceptable use of lethal force

6

Anonymous #18 4w

Unless he’s shooting her back against the wall from the hood of her car you can go fuck yourself. He had to reach to kill her. You justify the murder of a mother of 3 and I have no tolerance for you. Blocked

5

Anonymous #28 4w

Then we get to the point where we're arguing about this man's thought process which gets us nowhere

2

Anonymous #18 4w

From what I saw though he was on the side of her headlight and reached for his gun when she was in reverse. So 1 he wasn't fucking moved down violently by her car and he wasn't hurt by anything because he was not in front of the car nor hit by it. And 2. He reached for his weapon to use deadly force when not warranted by federal guidelines

2

Anonymous #28 4w

federal guidelines explicitly tell agents to not put themselves in a position where there is no alternative. he was clearly on the left side of her car as she was turning right when she accelerated. he's a murderer and #18 is a murder apologist

1

Anonymous #21 4w

Are you new?

2

Anonymous #28 4w

watch the video from the other angle and you can see he is directly in front of it and shoots straight ahead then moves (and also the bullet literally couldnt have been in the front of the windshield if he shot from the side)

1

Anonymous #38 4w

One thing I know is that people who protest peacefully are not killed ✌️

1

Anonymous twirling_tornado 4w

Why are yall still arguing about this? She’s dead and your words aren’t going to bring her back. Neither of yall are changing the others mind. Just call it quits atp.

1

Anonymous twirling_tornado 4w

impossible to shoot this shot from the side

1

Anonymous #21 4w

Kent State (1970), Orangeburg Massacre (1968), Memorial Day Massacre (1937), Manuel Esteban Paez Terán (2023)

2

Anonymous #27 4w

Since I doubt you'll read case law I found a video that goes through a few on TikTok by an attorney @rebmasel if you're interested in learning more about precedents

1

Anonymous #31 4w

I think it’s more you said the names of drugs on a social platform where you can’t just say anything

6

Anonymous #31 4w

If you’re talking about George Floyd, it was proven that he was on drugs. Which whatever site you just sited as evidence is propaganda.

2

Anonymous #27 4w

Bro being on drugs shouldn’t be a death sentence

3

Anonymous #38 4w

Oh my bad I meant it was never proven.

2

Anonymous #27 4w

Facts

1

Anonymous #38 4w

Did you tell it to the dealer or the drugs themselves?

1

Anonymous #61 4w

Immigration law changes constantly with new BIA decisions being released near daily on top of new regulations and executive orders - what are you talking about?

1

Anonymous #38 4w

They were there doing a lawful job. She got what she asked for

1

Anonymous #61 4w

Way to use the language of an SA apologist

1

Anonymous #61 4w

We’ll see how the FBI investigation goes and whether a Bivens action can pierce qualified immunity

1

Anonymous #38 4w

Think whatever you want. If she had been home she would still be alive. She was there to cause trouble. She accomplished it. How many illegals are you feeding and housing?

1

Anonymous #61 4w

Now you’re talking like the topic is Jewish people in ww2 Germany lol. I don’t feed or house any undocumented people but I am on the legal team of many

1

Anonymous #27 4w

I think your confused

5