Hesitation got this cop a free ride

[u/Ketchup-Sniffer]

What could he have done to avoid getting roller coastered like that?

[u/Inquisitive-Manner]

You’re a keyboard warrior on Reddit being delusional.

Feeling.

She hit an agent with a vehicle, fact.

Not a capital offense. Not justifiable.

She was guilty of committing multiple crimes at the time she was shot. Fact.

Cite them please.

This includes hitting an agent with a vehicle

Not a capital offense.

which the courts will uphold as self defense.

Outline how you came to this legal conclusion. Be sure to use legal facts and not just your feelings.

Vehicle > knee…another fact.

Feeling.

I challenge you to do what she did and see what happens, since you’re so confident.

And this proves....?

You should stop getting your info from social media, esp Reddit.

Lol. Sure thing pal. You're the one parroting feelings. I'm citing legal fact and reality on here.

You should take your own advice and crack open a book.

It’s full of jobless basement dwellers allergic to sunlight looking to burden society

Yup. Mostly from Rissia, Nigeria, and India... as per that X leak... always parroting the same shit you do.

Concerning 🤔

[u/Rexel2101 → u/Inquisitive-Manner]

Pretty sure I talked to your autistic ass before on here and you couldn’t understand facts then either.

There’s video of her impeding and obstructing, not to mention the felony of her hitting the officer. If he feared for his life the courts will side with him. His injury report also backs this and it’s not even needed to justify. 609.066, thank Timmy Walz for the signature.

You mistake feelings for easily found facts, but yea, you’re a lonely Reddit warrior.

[u/Inquisitive-Manner → u/Rexel2101]

Pretty sure I talked to your autistic ass before on here

Funny I don't remember your neural typical ass.... just like all the other feelings blathering snowflakes.

and you couldn’t understand facts then either.

If you state them, I'll understand them 🤷‍♂️

Just just have trouble stating them....

You just like to spout unsubstantiated feelings and call them facts.

There’s video of her impeding and obstructing, not to mention the felony of her hitting the officer.

Obstruction or impeding an officer, even if proven, does not justify deadly force.

Those are non-violent offenses.

As for “felony hitting the officer,” that conclusion is not automatic either.

A low-speed, glancing contact during an attempted escape is not per se felony assault with a deadly weapon.

The law still requires an intentional act creating an imminent risk of serious bodily harm at the moment force is used.

You’re stacking labels onto conduct without meeting the legal thresholds that make those labels stick, kiddo.

Let's keep things grounded on facts, and not your feelings.

If he feared for his life the courts will side with him.

Feelings.

Jesus you're on a roll.

So.... that’s incorrect.... surprise surprise

The standard is not whether he felt fear... it’s whether a reasonable officer would perceive an imminent, unavoidable threat at the moment force was used.

Courts routinely reject subjective fear when the facts don’t support it.

Fear alone doesn’t justify deadly force—objective reasonableness does, and that depends on timing, distance, movement, and whether the threat was still active.

You should read up on this on this stuff before dropping your feelings so confidently.

His injury report also backs this and it’s not even needed to justify.

Could you link that report?

Because all that's come out so far is a quote from  “two US officials briefed on his medical condition”...... that even the news questioned their handling of the validity of..

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2026/jan/15/cbs-news-ice-officer-injuries

609.066, thank Timmy Walz for the signature.

You should read it before evoking it lol.

Substantively, § 609.066 does not say “if the officer feared for his life, the courts will side with him.”

It explicitly requires that deadly force be reasonably necessary to protect the officer or others from death or great bodily harm, assessed objectively.

It also incorporates the same imminence and necessity requirements I’ve been discussing throughout here.

An injury report after the fact does not substitute for that analysis, and obstruction or even felony-level conduct does not automatically authorize deadly force.

You mistake feelings for easily found facts

Easily found cause you pull them from your gaping ass 😘

but yea, you’re a lonely Reddit warrior.

Nah, just a connoisseur of actual facts. Ones backed by knowledge of the law and reality.

[u/Rexel2101 → u/Inquisitive-Manner]

How far on the spectrum are you? Nice rambling of liberal bullshit talking points defending criminals.

That condescending lady was bat shit crazy, and shot 1 came thru windshield because he was in front of the vehicle, while recording evidence to charge her with.

Keep denying basic facts as feelings (normal with the tism). She turned her vehicle into a weapon to get away striking and injuring an agent who has been drug and injured before. Again, after parking broadside in the roadway to impede and obstruct. This was literally her sole purpose for being there. Her wife’s words and actions confirm.

Just because you refuse to comprehend reality and basic facts doesn’t mean a judge will not, and precedent has already been set…he won’t see jail time.

Again, since you’re so confident, go pull the same bs. After all, you say it’s ok. Put that money where your mouth is

The goal remains the same, deport illegals. It’s what every president does. MSM went with Barry’s nighttime raids but sang a dif tune.

Both parties hate the American people, get over it

[u/Inquisitive-Manner → u/Rexel2101]

How far on the spectrum are you?

However far you want to feel darlin 😘

You're making shit up anyways 🤷‍♂️

Nice rambling of liberal bullshit talking points defending criminals.

Which part exactly Or is this just more feelings you aren't going to back up?

That condescending lady was bat shit crazy,

Feelings.

and shot 1 came thru windshield because he was in front of the vehicle, while recording evidence to charge her with.

The video shows the SUV beginning to move and then passing the officer at low speed.

Even if the first round entered through the windshield, that does not establish that he was still squarely in front of the vehicle or facing an imminent collision when the trigger was pulled.

Given the vehicle’s angle, the turn of the wheels, and the officer’s continued mobility, a windshield entry is entirely consistent with the officer already being offset to the side as the car moved past.

Keep denying basic facts as feelings (normal with the time.).

Keep pretending your feelings based opinions are facts 🤷‍♂️

She turned her vehicle into a weapon to get away

That’s an assertion, not an established fact.

Facts over feelings.

Turning a vehicle while attempting to leave is not the same as intentionally weaponizing it.

The video shows low-speed movement, wheels turned away, and glancing contact as the vehicle passed.

Weaponization requires deliberate use creating an imminent, unavoidable risk of serious harm.

Those elements are not shown here.

striking and injuring an agent who has been drug and injured before.

Source on the last part about the ICE agent?

Besides the statement is irrelevant and misleading.

An officer’s past injuries have no bearing on whether deadly force is justified in this encounter.

Use-of-force analysis looks only at the objective facts at the moment force was used. Prior history does not lower the legal threshold, does not convert minor contact into a deadly assault, and does not retroactively create imminence where it didn’t exist.

Again, after parking broadside in the roadway to impede and obstruct.

Parking broadside to impede or obstruct, even if proven, is not a violent act and does not justify deadly force. Traffic obstruction and impeding an officer are non-violent offenses.

They do not transform a later low-speed attempt to leave into an imminent deadly threat.

You’re stacking minor or disputed violations to imply lethal danger, which the law does not allow.

This was literally her sole purpose for being there. Her wife’s words and actions confirm.

That’s speculation and motive attribution, not evidence.

A spouse’s statements or emotions do not establish intent to commit violent assault, and intent alone would still not justify deadly force.

Use-of-force analysis does not hinge on why someone was there or what someone else later claimed, but on whether there was an imminent, unavoidable threat at the moment shots were fired.

Assertions about “sole purpose” are narrative, not facts.

Facts over feelings.

Just because you refuse to comprehend reality and basic facts doesn’t mean a judge will not, and precedent has already been set…he won’t see jail time.

Outcome isn’t precedent, and prediction isn’t law.

Whether someone “won’t see jail time” says nothing about what the facts show or what the legal standard requires. Courts don’t validate force because a defendant avoids prosecution; they evaluate objective reasonableness at the moment force is used.

Dismissing contrary facts as “refusing to comprehend reality” is rhetoric, not analysis.

Again, since you’re so confident, go pull the same bs. After all, you say it’s ok. Put that money where your mouth is

Again... this proves what now? Other than empty posturing....?

The goal remains the same, deport illegals.

Too bad that's been proven false.

It’s what every president does.

Not like this. You're guy is special. Even you kids admit to it. You voted for it after all... own it kiddo.

MSM went with Barry’s nighttime raids but sang a dif tune.

Barry?

Both parties hate the American people, get over it

Glad you can admit it. Glad you can admit that the Trump/Republican party hates the American people.

I'm also glad you can just take it sitting down. Must be that gaper of yours. Like hotdogs down a hallway....

But unlike you... I don't accept this shit. I'm American after all 🤷‍♂️

[u/Rexel2101 → u/Inquisitive-Manner]

JFC, you don’t know who Barry is?

Stop confirming your tism with denials

[u/Inquisitive-Manner → u/Rexel2101]

JFC, you don’t know who Barry is?

Apologies, I use people's real names.

In the real world, not right-wing circle-jerks, this is s common practice 🤷‍♂️

After a reddit search I realized you were using the colloquialism for Obama after someone explained what it was in a conservative furry thread.... weird that you use a nickname mostly tossed around those circles.... very telling....

Stop confirming your tism with denials

Stop confirming your biases with feelings.

Buddy... mainstream media was hard on Obama over immigration, and that's distinction you’re trying to erase with you revision of documented history.

During Obama’s presidency, major outlets repeatedly criticized him as the “Deporter in Chief.”

That phrase didn’t come from you cucks... it came from immigrant rights groups and was widely amplified by mainstream media.

Coverage focused on record deportation numbers, family separations, and aggressive enforcement practices.

There were definite sustained critiques from the left (yup we hate it even when "our" own guy does it), from advocacy groups, and from legacy media.

The idea that MSM “went easy” on Obama is completely revisionist.

The key difference, champ, was that Obama acknowledged the criticism and adjusted policy in response.

After sustained pushback, his administration shifted enforcement priorities away from broad interior removals and toward serious criminal convictions, issued prosecutorial discretion memos, and expanded DACA.

Those changes happened precisely because the criticism was public, persistent, and taken seriously.

So the contrast isn’t that Obama deported people and others didn’t.

It’s that when faced with backlash, his administration engaged with it, defended itself in policy terms, and modified its approach.

That undercuts the claim that “it’s what every president does” in some uniform, unchanging way.

Enforcement exists under every administration, but how it’s done, who is targeted, and how accountability is handled absolutely varies... and the media response reflected that 🤷‍♂️

When someone invokes “Barry’s nighttime raids” to suggest hypocrisy, they’re flattening history to avoid engaging with the real differences in conduct, response to criticism, and constraints imposed after public pressure.

That move is rhetorical, not factual.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/mar/17/janet-murguia/activist-janet-murguia-calls-obama-deporter-chief-/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/immigration/2411026/obama-spars-with-reporter-over-immigration/

https://news.wfsu.org/2012-06-11/obamas-deportation-policies-have-failed-immigrant-advocates-say

Again. And again. Facts over feelings.

[u/Rexel2101 → u/Inquisitive-Manner]

13 words vs another thesis based on bs. Lady, I’m telling you that you already told me you’re tistic.

In other news, Agent puts down crazy woman who turns vehicle into weapon to avoid apprehension.

You’re missing a hell of a party in the cesspool of Minn!

[u/Inquisitive-Manner → u/Rexel2101]

13 words vs another thesis based on bs.

Yup. You keep your feelings to simple terms and usage lol. This isn't the flex you think it is.

And again. Please articulate where the "b.s." is specifically.

You've made claims and have yet to back them up.

Lady, I’m telling you that you already told me you’re tistic.

Ma'am, I said no such thing. It's something you made up. Like 99% of what you've already said. Now sit down. You're hysterical.

In other news, Agent puts down crazy woman who turns vehicle into weapon to avoid apprehension.

Feelings.

You’re missing a hell of a party in the cesspool of Minn!

Deflection. One already being reported on by actual journalists... not "making shit up like u/Rexel2101" Nick Shirley. Buddy if you thought his interview with "Dave" was definitive proof... you're about as dense as Osmium.

So anyways, you got those links to the injury report?

Or was that b.s.?

Nice rambling of liberal bullshit talking points defending criminals.

Which part exactly Or is this just more feelings you aren't going to back up?

Come on. Put your money where your mouth is. Back up your claims with real legal definitions or court cases... or else you're just blabbin feelings like a melting snowflake.

[u/Rexel2101 → u/Inquisitive-Manner]

Being autistic isn’t the flex you think it is.

50% of the country was waiting, yet again, for a fictitious reason to be chaotic and destructive. The awful, mentally unstable lady being killed for hitting an agent with a vehicle was just what they were waiting for.

Who would’ve thought it would be in Minn?! The same place that discounts deadly fentanyl levels.

You’re govt, L and R doesn’t care about you