Well at least we know you don't agree with the right to protestWell at least she recognises who is to blame, all self inflicted
Well at least we know you don't agree with the right to protestWell at least she recognises who is to blame, all self inflicted

Not sure how you have arrived at that, read my commentsWell at least we know you don't agree with the right to protest![]()

Never heard such nonsense, you have obviously never shot at anyoneResearch shows that they can stop. Average for a police officer is 0.35 seconds to stop once threat has ended. This guy was very highly trained so would have been quicker. I would say that, before the first shot had even been fired, he realised he was no longer in any danger, because by then he could see the car was moving away. It was too late to stop the first shot. But he only continued shooting to make sure of the kill.

You are talking about firing on a range or simulation, totally different to firing at someone.Research shows that they can stop. Average for a police officer is 0.35 seconds to stop once threat has ended. This guy was very highly trained so would have been quicker. I would say that, before the first shot had even been fired, he realised he was no longer in any danger, because by then he could see the car was moving away. It was too late to stop the first shot. But he only continued shooting to make sure of the kill.


Your comment is based on a range and in a controlled environment. It doesn't reflect anything like what happened in Minnesota, no stop fire command and no start fire command. Just pure and simple shoot to kill, exactly what the agent did. Read the report you are quoting and you will see. it has no bearing on an operational job.
I've read them...Well at least we know you don't agree with the right to protest![]()

You are barking up the wrong tree with this silly nonsense. A training range is nothing like a real life situation with a model turning red and green to stop and start. You could very easily empty a pistol magazine by the time you have heard a stop command, this was not a training exercise and has no bearing in the field. There is no law against firing 3 or 4 rapid shots in succession in actual fact it is part of your weapons training. You do not fire one single shot and then hope to god you hit the target or made the kill. The training and I have actually done this too, is to fire 3 shots to the chest area to take someone down and not fire at the head which is too small a target to hit, the way the ICE agent took the shots was exactly this way, had he waited a few seconds between shots then yes there could be a case to answer.According to all the training and research, the agent had plenty of time to re-evaluate the threat and make an informed decision before firing the controlled pair. I know it seems very quick, but the human brain is amazing.
Key Takeaways on Timing:
Gap Between Pairs (Transition): When engaging multiple targets or re-engaging the same target, a gap of 0.35 to 0.50 seconds is typical for, allowing for necessary re-evaluation of the threat.

So you believe it was her right in being parked in the middle of the road in an attempt to block these ICE agents and you believe she had the right to accelerate towards the armed agent as a right to protest ? You have a strange way of protesting.Of course if you do believe in the right to protest you would have no problem in saying she had a right to be there in the first place!
And have you ever gone somewhere you didn't fully want to go because someone close to you persuaded you?
Or the opposite?
You are barking up the wrong tree with this silly nonsense. A training range is nothing like a real life situation with a model turning red and green to stop and start. You could very easily empty a pistol magazine by the time you have heard a stop command, this was not a training exercise and has no bearing in the field. There is no law against firing 3 or 4 rapid shots in succession in actual fact it is part of your weapons training. You do not fire one single shot and then hope to god you hit the target or made the kill. The training and I have actually done this too, is to fire 3 shots to the chest area to take someone down and not fire at the head which is too small a target to hit, the way the ICE agent took the shots was exactly this way, had he waited a few seconds between shots then yes there could be a case to answer.

Actually I was about to say I am talking about military weapons training, I would have thought the police training would be the same. In my defence to this though the ICE agent may well have been ex forces as a lot of them are.You are conflating military training, where the intention is to kill using rapid bursts, with law enforcement training, where the aim is to fire a controlled pair, reassess, and then fire another controlled pair if necessary. All the research shows that he had time and that the human brain can actually do this. You seem to be admitting that his intention was to kill.
I think anyone watching the "effing be-ach" being executed, realised that was his sole aim.You seem to be admitting that his intention was to kill.