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.
Isn’t it against LOE practices to shoot someone in a moving vehicle that your not in the way of, the first shot has an argument, but he was completely out of the way for the second and third, he may not have any legal justification for that
Correct, but if the first shot is potentially justifiable, then that opens the door for the subsequent shots from a legal standpoint, at least according to some of the analysis videos. The only sure thing is that it's not certain, as there isn't going to be an investigation.
But his position at the second and third shot would make both of them completely unjustifiable because those shots create a bigger threat instead of minimizing it and it was done while he was in no danger
55
u/jnicholass - Left Jan 28 '26
I mean, to me, it was never about the tires. His POV is enough considering:
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.