zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. throwa+(OP)[view] [source] 2026-01-09 19:23:55
And my point is, apply regular human behavior to the scene. Drivers know the ground they are on and the acceleration curves of their cars. Arguing over split seconds to derive a malicious intention of the driver is cherry picking. We all know those near collisions we dodged closely from own experiences, thats why its so easy for us to imagine such an outcome in that video, which was prob her expectation too.
replies(1): >>banana+m1
2. banana+m1[view] [source] 2026-01-09 19:30:11
>>throwa+(OP)
Alright, at the very least, can we admit that there is an argument to be made here? The innocence or guilt of the officer does seem to hinge on some fine details, I’m just surprised that anybody is already claiming with certainty that this is or isn’t murder.
replies(1): >>throwa+I4
◧◩
3. throwa+I4[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-01-09 19:45:24
>>banana+m1
Its messy for sure. POs are allowed to use force to stop violent/aggressive suspects in cars, so he might get cleared of the coming murder charge. We will see.

The bigger picture isnt messy at all though. Deescalation is usually the way to go with protestors because they usually dont have harmful intent. This intention seems to be completely missing, from the exexutive layer down to officers in the streets.

replies(1): >>metaph+Bb
◧◩◪
4. metaph+Bb[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-01-09 20:16:07
>>throwa+I4
It is incomprehensible to me how the 2nd and 3rd shot from side window would not count as murder. A neighborhood isn't war zone where a sign of disobedience is a fair kill. Blasphemy of 1st amendment.
[go to top]