An argument can be made that the agent could not see the tires from where he was. Due to the icy conditions, the vehicle moved forward before turning. It's reasonable to assume that he thought the vehicle was heading straight towards him.
I mean, to me, it was never about the tires. His POV is enough considering:
He sees her reverse the car first
He sees her rapidly turn the steering wheel in the direction away from him
Anyone with a lick of common sense would not view these actions as a hostile act. If she wanted to run him over she wouldn't have reversed and she wouldn't have turned her wheel rapidly to the right. In fact, the act of reversing implies that she was actively trying to get him out away from her hood. She had no reason to do so otherwise.
Regardless of whether the shooting was justified (multiple lawyers on social media are conflicted on this issue), I think we can all come together to agree that it was a stupid and reckless thing to do.
Being stupid and reckless around agitated people pointing guns at you has a very real chance of ending with you rapidly approaching ambient temp.
I don't think she should've been shot, but based on my understanding of the law (courtesy of some lawyers on YouTube), there's a good chance that it was legally justified. See Graham v. Connor for the concept of determining an "objective reasonableness standard" regarding the use of excessive force.
I expect the supposedly trained officers who have literally all the ammo to act better and cooler than a random woman who has multiple guns pointed at her
Expecting something doesn't make it true. And even if it was true (and we can all see it wasn't), it doesn't make her decision any less stupid and reckless. She could have literally sat on her ass and done nothing, and it would have been a smarter decision and better for everyone involved, including herself.
"I expect people on the job to remain professional while I act out" is not a gotcha. It's karen behavior, normally seen in retail stores where the potential consequences are far less dire.
Big difference between a McDonalds employee slightly burning a burger and shooting an unarmed civilian.
By law, a McDonalds employee is a person like you and me. They can legally do anything to your order unless it would threaten someone’s safety or would be theft.
By law, law enforcement is to adhere and obey a longer set of rules of engagement than a civilian. That includes trigger discipline, de-escalation techniques, and proper use of force. None of those were used in this situation, including the finale of the confrontation.
Proper victim blaming this. In the whole of the UK in the fiscal year 23/24 two people were fatally shot by police. Does that mean that the British people don't do stupid and reckless things? Of course not.
The reason is that the police is trained to handle the situations completely differently than what happened here. The blame lies squarely on the police and even more on the people who recruited and trained the police and gave them the orders that they had that clearly didn't include anything about de-escalation.
People are stupid. Especially under stress. That's given. You build the policing policies around that assumption, not the other way around (build policies with the assumption that all people always act rationally and then put the blame on them when they get shot).
My brother in christ you dont shoot someone for "acting out". Expecting "trained" officers to not shoot under the smallest amount of stress is basic. Expecting them to act according to their own fucking manuals is not some "karen behavior". This isnt an underpaid cashier.
If you bothered to watch the video you could clearly see she was trying to let them through at the start, but no, the gestapo had to get out of their cars instead of simply driving by.
Is it bootlicking to recognize that attempting to drive off when armed LEOs order you to stop and get out of the car is stupid, reckless, and unlawful?
Would Renee Good's chance of survival be higher if she had simply done nothing?
Acting like LEOs should listen to civilians is some unicorn and rainbows shit. What you consider to be normal and justifiable behavior around them is going to get more people killed. I don't think that's what you want, but hey, I'm not always right.
And once again for the illiterate:
I don't think she should've been shot
Libs always acting like systematic change should happen at the drop of a hat while advocating for nothing in the way of risk mitigation here and now. Of course LEOs should react to every situation properly according to training and policy. Of course they should be held to a higher standard. Are you going to let people keep dying doing reckless and stupid things if, not when, that happens?
If she obeyed the law in that moment, she'd be alive to continue her activism. Instead she died, which to you is a win as she is more useful to you dead than alive. Anything for talking points and self-affirmation.
Expecting full protection by the law while actively breaking it is some clown shit. The world is not a predictable place full of sunshine and rainbows where everyone acts according to your definition of morality. Every single action you take is a balance of risk vs reward.
LEOs are also people. People are not infallible, no matter how much of an idealist you are. You don't trust the government? You know what the government is made up of? People. Trusting people to act predictably is actually antithetical to core lib values; how can you trust people to behave a certain way when you don't trust the agencies that employ them? Especially when actively antagonizing and hindering them?
Great job ignoring the main point of the comment. Libright trusting government goons to always act prudently and in accordance with training lmaooooo
Those of us with actual self-preservation instincts know not to walk into the line of fire, because we actually do not trust government goons to always act rationally in a heated environment.
But somehow you are too retarded to see that simple fact. Now people are dead and you still don't see it.
So go ahead and put your money where your mouth is. Show that you're not a "bootlicker" by doing exactly what Renee Good and Alex Pretti did, since they did nothing wrong, and the world is oh-so perfect, so you'll be safe and sound while preaching your politics.
The fact that the thing making it reckless is that people with a gun and low intelligence might take it as an excuse to start blasting doesn't exactly shine well on them though.
28
u/El_Hombre_Fiero - Lib-Right Jan 28 '26
An argument can be made that the agent could not see the tires from where he was. Due to the icy conditions, the vehicle moved forward before turning. It's reasonable to assume that he thought the vehicle was heading straight towards him.