Yeah, facts are pesky little things.

Old Army Ghost said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Yeah, facts are pesky little things.

---

fact is f16 concerned about this now only because she is maga

---

Oh gosh, I'm a DeSantis guy. So much for that.

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

If she wasn't a white woman, this would be different

---

No it would not. The legal analysis of whether it was justifiable homicide would remain the same.

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

Not analogous at all.

---

Yes it is. And you would have been singing the praises of the officer who saved the day from the rioters.

---

That's a lie. I defended Chauvin because he was not the cause of Floyd's death. Kim Potter believed she had pulled her taser not her service weapon.(Both went to jail.)

I defended Rittenhouse because he didn't shoot until presented with a deadly threat.

The standards for justifiable homicide remain the same. Avoidance or duty to retreat is the only element that varies by jurisdiction.

missed on a few of those cases eh

Wow, that was a record for fastest deleted comment in TexAgs history. Tanya is absolutely a mod.

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Wow, that was a record for fastest deleted comment in TexAgs history. Tanya is absolutely a mod.

---

If I was, I wouldn't keep getting banned.

Good try though.

And I don't even know what the deleted post was.

who knew being MAGA means you should be killed.

BoerneGator said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

usmcbrooks said:

---

Quote:

---

Tanya 93one safe place911sAgTanya 93Don't **** around
Because you will find out


She was climbing thru the window of a barricaded door.
Maybe don't do that.
That deserves death? she was unarmed.
Liberals have a warped way of looking at things. Many liberals are fine with killing babies too.


I know.

It is warped to think you might not get shot if you break into a locked place. pillage and burn cities, then attack someone while brandishing a firearm.


Of course, you will have your life ruined and be charged with 1st Degree murder and assault with a deadly weapon if you are the one who pulled the trigger.....

Do your neighbors know to tell people your house is an easy place?

---

FIFY

---

I think the rioters of BLM should have been shot.

Sorry to ruin your narrative

---

Except I think we've yet to see the first one even arrested, much less shot, after years of countless riots all across the country (in blue cities).

This woman posed NO threat that justified deadly force. Period. The coward who shot her isn't fit to wear a badge! Your defending his lack of judgment reflects upon your own.

---

Nearly 15,000 were arrested during the Floyd riots, and a third of those were federal cases.

911sAg said:

---

who knew being MAGA means you should be killed.

---

Now you know how the Texags liberals feel. They've jumped all over this thread.

Someone said your post wasn't very Christian so I asked if Tanya was now a Christian.

Abhorrent, I know. Totally worthy of a delete.

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Someone said your post wasn't very Christian so I asked if Tanya was now a Christian.

Abhorrent, I know. Totally worthy of a delete.

---

Yep
I am

Now, are you against the death penalty?

Keep trying.
It feeds my ego.

No Spin Ag said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

If we're ok with her shooting, then every BLM rioter that broke a window should have been killed. I'll make that trade. Let's line em up

---

Yep

The riots would have stopped early if these people had their asses handed to them in bullets and arrests.

---

All's fair in FAFO.

---

This issue is that it isn't. One guy offering protection got chased, his gun attempted to be taken away, beaten, and when he defended himself, the govt tried him for murder. On the flipside when the protester was conservative, she got blown away by the govt even though unarmed and didn't lay a finger on anyone. And zippo repurcissions.

Okay enough of this speculative BS.

If any of you are from or live in Fort Bend County, you likely know Troy Nehls and know hee's a no nonsense guy, Iraq Vet, 24 years LEO including being sheriff of FBC. They picture I've posted multiple time showing poor muzzle discipline on the part of Byrd in the House Chambers approximately 28 minutes before he shot Babbitt, I drew a red line showing the approximate trajectory path had he had an accidental discharge in the chambers since he was walking around with a Glock 22 with one in the chamber and finger on the trigger. In this picture is Troy Nehls wearing a blue oxford shirt. I drew a yellow arrow for those that don't know what an oxford shirt is. The Blue arrows are all secret service. Byrd is the one with the red line showing his lack of muzzle discipline, notice it's pointed directly at Troy, as well as others.



Here's statements from Troy himself, and he was there on January 6th, while protestors were banging on the doors to the House chamber he was trying to deescalate the situation, Lt. Byrd was photographed with his muzzle pointing directly at his back and his finger on the trigger.

28 minutes after this photo, Lt. Byrd shot and killed Ashli Babbitt. This officer clearly has very poor muzzle discipline and his use of lethal force against Ashli was unjustified.





Troy was face to face with the protestors trying to defuse the situation throughout the duration.



Speculate all you want but this is from someone who was there at the time


Troy serves on Jim Jordans committee


And here's some Gig'em cred for you

Quote:

---

I drew a yellow arrow for those that don't know what an oxford shirt is.

---

Good write up overall!

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

2040huck said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

If she wasn't a white woman, this would be different

---

No it would not. The legal analysis of whether it was justifiable homicide would remain the same.

---

Close your eyes and imagine it was a few hundred black people chanting hang Ted Cruz And then one broke into the inter chamber

---

Not analogous at all.

---

Yes it is. And you would have been singing the praises of the officer who saved the day from the rioters.

---

You're still posting here. Interesting. Still waiting for you to provide just ONE post from any other riot thread. Any other thread. Just one post from you.

Should be easy as you've posted in this one like 30 times already. You apparently really appreciate beating this dead woman's body.

Foreverconservative said:

---

Okay enough of this speculative BS.

If any of you are from or live in Fort Bend County, you likely know Troy Nehls and know hee's a no nonsense guy, Iraq Vet, 24 years LEO including being sheriff of FBC. They picture I've posted multiple time showing poor muzzle discipline on the part of Byrd in the House Chambers approximately 28 minutes before he shot Babbitt, I drew a red line showing the approximate trajectory path had he had an accidental discharge in the chambers since he was walking around with a Glock 22 with one in the chamber and finger on the trigger. In this picture is Troy Nehls wearing a blue oxford shirt. I drew a yellow arrow for those that don't know what an oxford shirt is. The Blue arrows are all secret service. Byrd is the one with the red line showing his lack of muzzle discipline, notice it's pointed directly at Troy, as well as others.



Here's statements from Troy himself, and he was there on January 6th, while protestors were banging on the doors to the House chamber he was trying to deescalate the situation, Lt. Byrd was photographed with his muzzle pointing directly at his back and his finger on the trigger.

28 minutes after this photo, Lt. Byrd shot and killed Ashli Babbitt. This officer clearly has very poor muzzle discipline and his use of lethal force against Ashli was unjustified.





Troy was face to face with the protestors trying to defuse the situation throughout the duration.



Speculate all you want but this is from someone who was there at the time


Troy serves on Jim Jordans committee


And here's some Gig'em cred for you

---

f nehls
he said to j6 protestors
"No, sir, I cannot support what you're doing, this is criminal.'"

damiond said:

---

Foreverconservative said:

---

Okay enough of this speculative BS.

If any of you are from or live in Fort Bend County, you likely know Troy Nehls and know hee's a no nonsense guy, Iraq Vet, 24 years LEO including being sheriff of FBC. They picture I've posted multiple time showing poor muzzle discipline on the part of Byrd in the House Chambers approximately 28 minutes before he shot Babbitt, I drew a red line showing the approximate trajectory path had he had an accidental discharge in the chambers since he was walking around with a Glock 22 with one in the chamber and finger on the trigger. In this picture is Troy Nehls wearing a blue oxford shirt. I drew a yellow arrow for those that don't know what an oxford shirt is. The Blue arrows are all secret service. Byrd is the one with the red line showing his lack of muzzle discipline, notice it's pointed directly at Troy, as well as others.



Here's statements from Troy himself, and he was there on January 6th, while protestors were banging on the doors to the House chamber he was trying to deescalate the situation, Lt. Byrd was photographed with his muzzle pointing directly at his back and his finger on the trigger.

28 minutes after this photo, Lt. Byrd shot and killed Ashli Babbitt. This officer clearly has very poor muzzle discipline and his use of lethal force against Ashli was unjustified.





Troy was face to face with the protestors trying to defuse the situation throughout the duration.



Speculate all you want but this is from someone who was there at the time


Troy serves on Jim Jordans committee


And here's some Gig'em cred for you

---

f nehls
he said to j6 protestors
"No, sir, I cannot support what you're doing, this is criminal.'"

---

Trying to diffuse while standing right next to someone with a gun who would shoot the first person to come through that door.

I don't think Nehls get to ask why Byrd didn't try to diffuse when he's got someone next to him willing to do what Byrd did, but revisionist history and all.

Anonymous Source said:

---

Trying to diffuse while standing right next to someone with a gun who would shoot the first person to come through that door.

I don't think you get to ask why Byrd didn't try to diffuse when you've got someone next to you willing to do what Byrd did, but revisionist history and all.

---

You sure assume a whole lot. You have zero idea whether the other officers would have reacted just like Byrd did. In fact if they were going to act like Byrd they would have shot this guy in the face for sticking his head in, that's what Byrd did to Babbit, she had just stuck her head through when Byrd killed her.

Breaking windows in the door to the House Chambers is criminal, it doesn't carry the death penalty but it is criminal, trespass 18 U.S.C. 1752(c) at a minimum, destruction of federal property 18 U.S.C. 1361 at the most. All criminal, is that not a correct statement?

The cerebral impetuousness in this discussion is amazing

Foreverconservative said:

---

Breaking windows in the door to the House Chambers is criminal, it doesn't carry the death penalty but it is criminal, trespass 18 U.S.C. 1752(c) at a minimum, destruction of federal property 18 U.S.C. 1361 at the most. All criminal, is that not a correct statement?

The cerebral impetuousness in this discussion is amazing

---

Only, Babbitt was not the one breaking those windows. Two guys were. And they were allowed to do so by the cops a few feet away.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Several officers on babbit's side of the window were just watching her try to get through. One officer on the far side just decides to shoot despite nobody else having even attempted physical restraint.

Bad shoot.

---

That is an important point. I doubt those 5 police officers within a couple of feet of her really considered anyone would shoot her. That said I would have thought one or more of them would have pulled her back from the window.

YellowPot_97 said:

---

Hopefully they don't get a dime.

She was crawling through a broken window, of a barricaded door, deep in the capitol, in the middle of a riot, feet from members of congress. How anyone can defend her actions is amazing to me.

---

I must admit I haven't read any post defending her actions, ever. The argument is whether she should have been shot.

Legal precedent and many laws concerning deadly force indicates this was an unwarranted bad shoot. You seem to be changing the argument.

Old Army Ghost said:

---

f16 only feels the way we do because she was a trumper

---

I disagree completely.

He's wrong.

He is using an outdated Use of Force Continuum that he learnt in the academy 30 plus years ago. It was taught for a while, way back when until LE and the courts realized it was unrealistic for the actual world.

Here is the actual correct legal analysis. Andrew Branca, conservative, pro gun, experienced attorney...
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/09/law-of-self-defense-analysis-jan-6-shooting-of-ashli-babbitt-was-legally-justified/

911sAg said:

---

Her crime being white.....


Apparently secret service are judge, jury and executioners. Imagine if a black person was shot breaking into a libary for instance.

---

An UNARMED black man.

They'd have a summer of riots. 5 funerals. A platinum coffin and we'd all be expected to apologize for our whiteness.

oldcrow91 said:

---

TRADUCTOR said:

---

Unarmed, door was not barricaded and the assessment a 110lb lady was a threat that warranted being shot to death is criminal negligence. Certainly was not fentanyl that killed her.

---

You will need to post video, once I have seen show locked doors and stuff in front of them and her being the first one through the window.

If they had shot the first trespasser, none of that happens.

---

I have seen the video on a couple of J6 documentaries. She is standing back from the barricaded doors surrounded by capital policemen, and through the doors you can see a hand holding a gun protruding through a window of a wall facing the atrium that the doors lead to and he fired at her. I can't tell if he could even tell who he was firing at or not, he may have been firing randomly into the crowd. Nothing about the shooting was justified on any level.

Pizza said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

The penalty for that is supposed to be jail, not death.

---

If this was a liberal, so many on here would support them being shot


And we know it.

At least I am consistent on this.

---

I'm done with this thread, and I'm interested to see what other people think down the line.

Now watch how a Man sticks to his word, woman.

---

Technically flatbread.

Hey no seriously we'll be cool. Just move the desks and let us in. We just want to talk to the congress critters. Maybe vigorously.



Looks like a still from a horror flick, although those usually go poorly for the barricaded folk. They still look nervous even after the threat was defused assuming this is post shot.

Faustus said:

---

Hey no seriously we'll be cool. Just move the desks and let us in. We just want to talk to the congress critters. Maybe vigorously.



Looks like a still from a horror flick, although those usually go poorly for the barricaded folk. They still look nervous even after the threat was defused assuming this is post shot.

---

Looks like a different area all together to me.

The screencap I am posting is just before the shooting. The are in a doorway with multiple doors facing a hallway. The hand with the gun is projecting through a broken out window. There is not a man's face up against diamond shaped divided glass window in the door.

Here is the link:

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/capitol-shooting-that-led-to-ashli-babbitt-s-death-captured-on-video-99180613572

That video looks bad. It also misses the actual shoot.

There's actual footage showing the actual shooting. It has her jump up and going through the window. About 6 inches through the window is when she is shot, knocking her back out of the window.

InfantryAg said:

---

He's wrong.

He is using an outdated Use of Force Continuum that he learnt in the academy 30 plus years ago. It was taught for a while, way back when until LE and the courts realized it was unrealistic for the actual world.

Here is the actual correct legal analysis. Andrew Branca, conservative, pro gun, experienced attorney...
https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/09/law-of-self-defense-analysis-jan-6-shooting-of-ashli-babbitt-was-legally-justified/

---

For those that don't want to read from the website strangely called "legalinsurrection" here is the actual analysis by Branca that the website lifted from the transcript of this video. This is Branca in his own words

I'm not saying I agree with his analysis but it is his legal opinion and should be considered. Branca is well respected and his specialty is self defense law. My argument with him is his application of self defense law under the castle laws and as it applies to John Q Public and his home is really apples and oranges when it involves a LEO and Rules of Engagement, which in this case are the DOJ Guidelines that I posted two or three pages ago. When you are a sworn LEO you are in fact on the same legal ground as anyone that is in the military. LEOs supposed to be held to a higher standard, because you are given power not available to John Q Citizen. And I assure you from personal experience, when you go in front of a Firearm Discharge Review Board the well known innocent before proven guilty does not apply, the same as it doesn't apply in a military Court Martial proceeding. Again this is in the Firearm Discharge Review Board proceeding, not a court of law if he would have been indicted. Rules of Engagement are very relevant, and the Capitol Hill Police Dept adhere to the ROG laid out by the DOJ which I linked to earlier.



Branca makes several mistakes in his analysis. In the 27 minute mark he describes Babbitt as "violently breaking the window to unlawfully breach the barricade." when in fact Babbitt didn't break ANY widows according to the video evidence, the same video evidence Branca claims he reviewed. So I'm not sure where he got that presumption. He also claims that "Babbitt knew Byrd had a gun pointed at her and she advanced anyway" again I question that presumption because Byrd was hiding behind a door, and then lunged forward where he suddenly appears in the frame and one shot is fired less that two seconds apart. In other words she never saw it coming.

Branca also based his justification of Byrd's action based on inaccurate radio squawk of shot's fired (which didn't happed) and calls of officer's down, which based on Hawgs video was mostly self inflicted injuries due to gassing themselves with CS gas because they couldn't judge which way the wind was blowing.

Branca has an opinion as a self defense attorney and that's fine. Troy has an opinion as a lifelong LEO who only was sworn into congress three days earlier on January 3, 2021. I'm biased toward Troy for personal reasons so it's hard to be 100% objective, but I try to be fair at all costs. IMHO Byrd was wrong. ANd he may have avoided criminal liability, but when it comes to this civil case it's going to be a different ballgame with different rules, and the fact it's files in California really is going to be difficult to walk out unscaved. However he does have Babbitt's affiliation with MAGA in his corner and most Californians are immdeiately triggered against anything like that. So time will tell on the lawsuit itself.

Fact remains Ashli Babbitt is dead and it's tragic.

I agree Branca's analysis is flawed insofar as looking at the case as you would a citizen/ non-LE perspective. Most people on this thread are using these same arguments whether for or against the shooting being legal.

Troy's analysis is still wrong and dated.

Police use of force is judged primarily by Graham V Connor. Scott V Harris will probably come into play, at least with the civil case. If you aren't familiar with Graham V Connor, your opinion is not based on the actual case law governing this.

Here are the facts...
Capital Police are supposed to protect members of Congress. This was the final barricade before reaching the area where senators and congressmen were located. The barricade was breached by the crowd. The crowd was angry and breaking out glass and attempting to breach the barricade. This is not protesting, this is a riot (18USC 2102 (a). Babbit was going through the breach and just entered into the restricted area. The crowd trying to enter the restricted area, Babbit was just the first through.

So the question is, what was the crowd going to do in the restricted area?

A reasonable officer could conclude that the "mob" would continue to come through the breach. When they reached the senators and congressman they could assault them, hold them hostage, have tea with them. LE does not have to wait for an assault, they can and should react to the threat of an imminent assault. A reasonable officer in that situation could conclude the senators and congressman he was assigned to protect, would be assaulted.

Had Babbit been by herself, or with a small group, that changes the equation. The more people allowed to breach, the less likely the officers could stop them (as shown in the rest of the capitol). Had a number of blm breached the White House the previous summer, Secret Service isn't going to let them get to POTUS before starting to shoot. Even if the crowd is "unarmed."

Also,
Police also do not have "rules of engagement."
DOJ guidelines are not law. USCP is not part of the DOJ anyway.
And yes, it's tragic that she died.