This post is Proof of Work. 🫡 Massive respect to you, man. I came to the same conclusion, he saw her moving and leaned into the front of the vehicle to have an excuse to shoot. It was convincing, but with all the angles, it's quite obvious that he was clear of the vehicle when he opened fire. image

Replies (3)

Look, only God know what was in that man’s head. he was dragged by another car earlier. everyone trying to treat this as a clear cut this or that case should be sitting at the kids table and not contributing to the discussion. She created a messy situation, and he responded to the messy situation. That’s what being in the arena is about. laws are written for the man in the arena. if he clearly walked up to her and blasted when she wasn’t spinning her tires out, then yes, it’s clear and cut. but it wasn’t . it’s a mess. i don’t like that it happened i would not like a world where we hold men in the messy arena to a sterile standard. in fact, if you try enforcing impossible standards, that just incentivizes people to abandon civilization and return to the law of the jungle
It seems to me like you are implying that not shooting a civilian in the head 3 times - two of them from the side of her vehicle when in zero danger - is an "impossible standard". I think it's a pretty basic standard, along with not calling citizens "fucking bitch" after you killed them. Along with allowing medics to provide aid to the person you just shot. And not leaving the scene immediately with your firearm. Along with the entire Federal government not dragging her name through the mud and calling her a terrorist before an investigation even began. I think these should be considered bottom of the fucking barrel standards. And neither the agent nor the Federal government lived to to these basic standards. It's not just about the (senseless and evil) shooting, it's the entire shit sandwich.