Posted on Mar 18, 2021
Was the Shooting of Ashli Babbitt Justifiable?
7.24K
162
69
10
10
0
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 14
10
9
1
Cpl Bill Johnson
SSgt (Join to see) that isn't how it works. A police officer may use deadly force to protect himself or others from death or serious physical injury. Justified. Completely.
(3)
(1)
SFC William Farrell
MAJ Steve Warnerski - Yeah, Im a combat veteran and a police officer. Ive seen my share of horror, what have you seen behind a keyboard?
(0)
(0)
SFC William Farrell
SSgt (Join to see) - Since this topic came up again, I'll respond to your ridiculous comment about a handful of people. I don know what you consider an handful but I'd consider that five or less. It wasn't a handful of people rioting, it ws a mob. Keep drinking Trump's fruit punch.
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SSgt (Join to see) down voted for mischaracterization and lack of context.
Or, maybe just stupidity if you really believe that there is no such thing as a justified shooting without a trial.
Or, maybe just stupidity if you really believe that there is no such thing as a justified shooting without a trial.
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
The fact that she was the ONLY person shot is a testament to the overhwleming restrainint shown by the LEOs, not a testament to the lack of judgment by one.
The fact that she was the ONLY person shot is a testament to the overhwleming restrainint shown by the LEOs, not a testament to the lack of judgment by one.
(8)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
I ain't a LEO. I am looking this PURELY through my (ex)-military lens.
There was an active siege against property they were required to protect, in which people they were required to protect were doing business. And those laying siege had made threats against the health and well being of the same people the LEOs were sworn to protect. If that had been me and my PLT in that building and it was a bunch of unarmed Iraqis coming through, there would have been a whole LOT of dead unarmed Iraqis.
Now, I understand that that is not a straight apples to apples comparison, for many reasons. 1) A military PLT is not a group of LEOs (unless they are MPs); 2) Iraqis storming an American FOB is not the same as American citizens storming the American Capitol Building; 3) the Capitol building, if occupied, does not give the occupiers a whole shit-ton of arms to escalate the fight; 4) There is much less of a language barrier, so verbal orders are much more effective; 5) I am sure there are more.
But despite the apples-to-oranges comparison, both are still fruit. And both situations still involve a siege with threats of deadly force from the attackers. And even without that, multiple LEOs were injured - some severely - during this attack. Nothing I am aware of requires Officers to die before using lethal force. They have to have a valid fear of deadly force from the attackers. If they are willing and able to beat a LEO, there is no reason to believe they WON'T beat them until dead or dying. Especially if LEOs continue to do their job and impede progress, even once injured. And if they are threatening death to the citizens that LEOs are sworn to protect, and have the apparent means and motive to do so (remember, a baseball bat CAN be just as lethal as a firearm), then the LEOs once again should have authorization to use force, up to and including deadly force.
I am not saying that the death of Ashli Babbitt is fortunate, a good thing, or anything else like that. She was shot and killed while unarmed, which is incredibly sad and unfortunate. But she was ALSO shot and killed while actively trying to fight through a barricade to lead a charge against other American citizens, and doing do VERY illegally against armed law enforcement.
As I said above, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
There was an active siege against property they were required to protect, in which people they were required to protect were doing business. And those laying siege had made threats against the health and well being of the same people the LEOs were sworn to protect. If that had been me and my PLT in that building and it was a bunch of unarmed Iraqis coming through, there would have been a whole LOT of dead unarmed Iraqis.
Now, I understand that that is not a straight apples to apples comparison, for many reasons. 1) A military PLT is not a group of LEOs (unless they are MPs); 2) Iraqis storming an American FOB is not the same as American citizens storming the American Capitol Building; 3) the Capitol building, if occupied, does not give the occupiers a whole shit-ton of arms to escalate the fight; 4) There is much less of a language barrier, so verbal orders are much more effective; 5) I am sure there are more.
But despite the apples-to-oranges comparison, both are still fruit. And both situations still involve a siege with threats of deadly force from the attackers. And even without that, multiple LEOs were injured - some severely - during this attack. Nothing I am aware of requires Officers to die before using lethal force. They have to have a valid fear of deadly force from the attackers. If they are willing and able to beat a LEO, there is no reason to believe they WON'T beat them until dead or dying. Especially if LEOs continue to do their job and impede progress, even once injured. And if they are threatening death to the citizens that LEOs are sworn to protect, and have the apparent means and motive to do so (remember, a baseball bat CAN be just as lethal as a firearm), then the LEOs once again should have authorization to use force, up to and including deadly force.
I am not saying that the death of Ashli Babbitt is fortunate, a good thing, or anything else like that. She was shot and killed while unarmed, which is incredibly sad and unfortunate. But she was ALSO shot and killed while actively trying to fight through a barricade to lead a charge against other American citizens, and doing do VERY illegally against armed law enforcement.
As I said above, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
(2)
(0)
SGT Thomas LaRochelle
Again, you are an idiot!!! All the violence and this idiot shoots a woman hanging through a window! I guess, to you, someone looking at you funny is reason to be shot. You need to be on a watch list, buddy!
(1)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SGT Thomas LaRochelle No. To me, a person looking at me funny is an opportunity to make a silly face.
But a person actively trying to breach the security of my home - along with a couple thousand "friends" - is a completely justifiable kill. And if they are chanting that they want to hang my wife, that's not only a double-tap, it's a double tap with a butt stroke to make sure they are really dead. I don't care if that person is picking the lock, hanging through a window, or just outside the door banging on it. You threaten the lives of the people in my home, don't expect to live long enough to get the chance to try.
The LEO was sworn to protect the people Ashli Babbit and her "friends" were trying to KILL. As one of only a few guards against a MOB, his best bet was a barricade, which he did. Once the mob started to breach the barricade, he had no choice but to escalate. You complain that she was "hanging through a window." But that is only because she was stopped from advancing. It's not like her plan was to just chill out in the window, waving "hello" to the Leo's. She was ACTIVELY BREACHING. No one "deserves to die." Ever. But there are PLENTY of people killed in "good shoots." Ashli Babbitt did not deserve to die. But her shoot was clean, justifiable, and provoked by her own actions.
But a person actively trying to breach the security of my home - along with a couple thousand "friends" - is a completely justifiable kill. And if they are chanting that they want to hang my wife, that's not only a double-tap, it's a double tap with a butt stroke to make sure they are really dead. I don't care if that person is picking the lock, hanging through a window, or just outside the door banging on it. You threaten the lives of the people in my home, don't expect to live long enough to get the chance to try.
The LEO was sworn to protect the people Ashli Babbit and her "friends" were trying to KILL. As one of only a few guards against a MOB, his best bet was a barricade, which he did. Once the mob started to breach the barricade, he had no choice but to escalate. You complain that she was "hanging through a window." But that is only because she was stopped from advancing. It's not like her plan was to just chill out in the window, waving "hello" to the Leo's. She was ACTIVELY BREACHING. No one "deserves to die." Ever. But there are PLENTY of people killed in "good shoots." Ashli Babbitt did not deserve to die. But her shoot was clean, justifiable, and provoked by her own actions.
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
While it is shameful what the D.C. protestors did, it's even more shameful the way Pelosi and her peers have used the whole incident as a propaganda event.
Was shooting her appropriate? I have no real idea since they won't release the details, but on it's face it appears to be NOT justified. The media is as culpable as the rioters in my opinion.
Was shooting her appropriate? I have no real idea since they won't release the details, but on it's face it appears to be NOT justified. The media is as culpable as the rioters in my opinion.
(7)
(0)
SSG Bill McCoy
PO3 Justin Bowen - Not at all; I said (of the video), "... it appears to be NOT justified."
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google