This is an interesting take and it's one I agree with:
x.com
#128 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

The take is, "if you say ICE is bad they will stand in front of your car and kill you." What do you find so appealing about that?

Apart from all of that. The number of supposed "christian," "small government" "don't tread on me" folks scrambling to malign this woman and reflexively defend or even cheer for killing by law enforcement is truly sickening. The right has lost its mind in this country and i'm not sure how we come back from what's happening.

Most law enforcement training instructs officers not to position themselves in front of running vehicles. This is why when you are pulled over, the cop doesn't stand in front of your car to keep you there.

DHS policy explicitly states that officers should not intentionally place themselves in positions in which they have no alternative to using deadly force. The video reflects this officer's deliberate choice to move to his right as the vehicle reversed but not quite enough to get out of the way. He had time to continue getting out of the way but chose to stay there and draw his weapon instead. This is contrary to his own agency's policy.

Furthermore, DOJ use of force policy explicitly instructs that firing a gun at a moving vehicle should not occur unless there is imminent risk of serious bodily injury or death, AND no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, "which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle."

I realize these situations unfold in a manner of seconds and that some jurors might see this as an edge case like Rittenhouse's. But just like with Killer Kyle, this officer appears to be abusing self-defense rules to create an edge case and get away with murder.

He thinks this makes America Stronger.

I don't believe he thinks that at all. In fact i doubt it's even a consideration for him.

Some American oil companies and/or billionaires connected to Trump will get richer from this somehow. That's it.

Trump acts entirely out of self-interest and his pathetic lapdog GOP cucks eat up every minute of it.

#62 I didn't call it a war crime, i called it an act of war. But you'd rather quibble over terminology and pretend to deliver a history lesson rather than take a position on your pedo president starting wars.

Historically US engineered regime change has gone poorly.
#34 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

That's your take here? Just blandly summarizing stats?

We just committed an insanely brazen act of war. Imagine a latam country deposing and arresting Trump. Would you merely remark that historically speaking, it is a bad idea?

What do all the "America First," "Pro Peace," "No New Wars," "Conservatives" think about this?

I remember when Republicans were embarrassed enough to invent fake reasons to go to war for oil. Now they just do it, and say they're doing it.