• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Sick sick world what is wrong with people

Lost Mango said:
And also ICE have no actual legal status against an US citizen except when it comes to immigration matters. They have no authority to deal with traffic violations or protests etc, so unless she was directly preventing them from making an arrest (not obvious in that video as a car drives past the front of her car so she isn't actually blocking traffic even) then in that situation they are just armed citizens trying to kidnap another citizen.
Click to expand...
No right to defend themselves if a car is driven at them.

Was clear that as the car had been previously blocking their way that they were protestors. That then drove at them, can see why they tried to stop the threat, especially considering all the terror attacks where vehicles have been used.
 
Lost Mango said:
She doesn't drive at him and is not accelerating towards him. She is moving forward and right to drive away as they originally told her too before they decided to get her out of the car. People will see what they want to see from both sides of the argument here so I get that the car moves forward but is turning away from him before he fires

The fore-shortening in the other angle doesn't show contact or driving at him. It confirms she was turning right. You can't tell from it how close they are and his movement doesn't show that he is hit by the car or anything. The other video where he clearly is untouched has been even more widely shared, so I find it very hard to believe you hadn't seen it before commenting here but just chose to use the one being used by the White House etc .. In that he holsters his gun, takes 5 seconds to compose himself, and then walks down towards the crash and then is filmed walking back up to the ICE vehicles a little later. To suggest there was contact is just fantasy. If he had to go to hospital it was to be treated for shock that he had just shot someone.

Interesting another video which apparently shows ICE refusing to let a doctor who happened to be there approach the crashed car to even see if she had a pulse which is just a bizarre take on the humanity of some of these people.

In all likelihood the massive recruitment of 'enthusiastic' (!) law-abiding citizens (🤣) into ICE over the last 6 months has produced a semi-legal militia who are not properly trained to deal with these situations. There was no need to fire at her face. He was badly positioned and he probably shouldn't have had his weapon out as there was no evidence she was armed or dangerous and he could simply have been both better positioned and reacted normally by stepping aside for the '2 ton weapon aimed at him'.
Click to expand...

The fact its being made out as "the left will only see what they want" like its about politics and not humanity and just dealing with a situation in the correct way is just a fcuking odd way of looking at it too.

The video shows he waving them through, one car bothers, the other doesn't, she doesn't drive at the guy with intent from any angle, she is clearly trying to get away, which at worse is not a crime worthy of being shot at.

People are just fudging odd looking at the video and having any other response than its a brutal use of gunfire.
 
Danish female prime minister comes out as far right.


"Denmark’s prime minister Mette Fredericksen has announced a ruthlessdeportation policy aimed at Muslims, claiming they threaten the country’s way of life and happiness.

“You are not supposed to be here. We are fed up with your reckless way of life. We are fed up with your culture of dominance. You are destroying the happiest country in the world,” she said."

Vile woman, probably got nice furniture though.
 
thfcsteff said:
What do people see?
A banana?
An apple?
An apple behaving as a banana?
Or an apple disguised as a banana?

(n.b. this is a non-prejudicial question which is not designed to be sarcastic, cause frustration or anger in any way.
No opinions are 'lesser' than others.

p.s. if this is the wrong thread, mods, please move to the right one. Thank you.

View attachment 21191
Click to expand...

Looks a duck
Sounds a duck
Is a.........................


1767917587794.png
 
thfcsteff said:
What do people see?
A banana?
An apple?
An apple behaving as a banana?
Or an apple disguised as a banana?

(n.b. this is a non-prejudicial question which is not designed to be sarcastic, cause frustration or anger in any way.
No opinions are 'lesser' than others.

p.s. if this is the wrong thread, mods, please move to the right one. Thank you.

View attachment 21191
Click to expand...
A cucumber pretending to be a banana
 
thfcsteff said:
And that is absolutely your right Sir. In fact, there is probably an argument to made that because a banana grows on a tree, and so do the likes of elderberries and mulberries, we should perhaps broaden our horizons and accept that it is perfectly feasible that a banana could, maybe even should, in fact be a berry.
Click to expand...

I was being botanically accurate - it is a berry (seeds on the inside of one swollen ovary rather than multiple ovaries and/or seeds on the outside).

And bananas aren't trees they are extended leaves to make the stem so they are a herb, not a tree.

Not to be overly pedantic about the whole thing, whilst elderberries are berries, mulberries aren't, they are what is known as a multifruit.
 
Lost Mango said:
I was being botanically accurate - it is a berry (seeds on the inside of one swollen ovary rather than multiple ovaries and/or seeds on the outside).

And bananas aren't trees they are extended leaves to make the stem so they are a herb, not a tree.

Not to be overly pedantic about the whole thing, whilst elderberries are berries, mulberries aren't, they are what is known as a multifruit.
Click to expand...

This is very quickly becoming excitingly philosophical. Perceptions v accuracy v terminologies v contexts. Excellent.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
No right to defend themselves if a car is driven at them.

Was clear that as the car had been previously blocking their way that they were protestors. That then drove at them, can see why they tried to stop the threat, especially considering all the terror attacks where vehicles have been used.
Click to expand...
Man, you have really glugged down that Kool Aide. There can only be two explanations for that take. Either you have brick in your eyes, or you support state sanctioned murder! One of the most disgusting posts I have ever read on here. you should be ashamed of yourself!
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
Danish female prime minister comes out as far right.


"Denmark’s prime minister Mette Fredericksen has announced a ruthlessdeportation policy aimed at Muslims, claiming they threaten the country’s way of life and happiness.

“You are not supposed to be here. We are fed up with your reckless way of life. We are fed up with your culture of dominance. You are destroying the happiest country in the world,” she said."

Vile woman, probably got nice furniture though.
Click to expand...

She didn't mention Muslims but yeah cool. Is this what you want in the UK?
 
scaramanga said:
And she has caused him to panic by driving a car at him.

How much does a person have to desperately want ICE agents to be wrong to think it's ok to drive a 2 ton car at one if them?

I would expect to get shot if I drove a car at an armed officer. It wasn't all that long ago that a similar thing happened in the UK
Click to expand...
I don't want agents to be in the wrong, this has nothing to do with some hopeful agenda. This is about trained personnel acting as such.

He is, or at least hopefully is, firearms trained. He is also trained, again hopefully, to assess situations and how to control himself in said situations.

He has exercised no restraint at all, simply just gone for the gun the second the wheels started to move. He had enough time, imo, to move and handle the situation differently.

If he was being driven at from 100yds away at high speed then yes, I would expect shots to be fired - and sure as brick he would not stand in the way of the vehicle but seek cover to fire from. She has started to move from a standing position, on fairly poor road condition, from about 5-10ft - that is not being driven at in any manner of speed.

Do you remember the two British lads (Army) dragged from their car in Ireland by a baying mob who thought they were loyalists?
Those lads were armed, those lads were trained, and they were certainly in dire peril - they didn't shoot anyone, they did discharge their guns into the air in a vain attempt to get out of the situation.

That is control/restraint.
 
Trixster said:
I don't want agents to be in the wrong, this has nothing to do with some hopeful agenda. This is about trained personnel acting as such.

He is, or at least hopefully is, firearms trained. He is also trained, again hopefully, to assess situations and how to control himself in said situations.

He has exercised no restraint at all, simply just gone for the gun the second the wheels started to move. He had enough time, imo, to move and handle the situation differently.

If he was being driven at from 100yds away at high speed then yes, I would expect shots to be fired - and sure as brick he would not stand in the way of the vehicle but seek cover to fire from. She has started to move from a standing position, on fairly poor road condition, from about 5-10ft - that is not being driven at in any manner of speed.

Do you remember the two British lads (Army) dragged from their car in Ireland by a baying mob who thought they were loyalists?
Those lads were armed, those lads were trained, and they were certainly in dire peril - they didn't shoot anyone, they did discharge their guns into the air in a vain attempt to get out of the situation.

That is control/restraint.
Click to expand...
This is like the Chris Kaba shooting in the UK. A vehicle is a weapon. A very powerful and lethal one. This is recognised in criminal and civil law. In personal injury cases involving vehicles colliding with pedestrians UK law recognises that the fault is always heavily weighted towards the driver and the established case precent for that actually cites the words "a driver is in command of a lethal weapon".

When officers are engaging with a person in control of a vehicle which then moves when they are in close proximity following a command to stop/take hands off the wheel, they have effectively been engaged with a weapon. That is protocol and that is the law here and in the US and people jump to conclusions based on snippets of footage and 3rd hand accounts. It will be the law that judges whether the officer's use of force was commensurate to the threat and whether they followed protocol. Ultimately, what you have here is yet another person that decided to drive their vehicle when commanded by armed law enforcement officers to stop......they created their own death situation no matter how much fault/blame you place on the officer - she is the one that has forced a split second judgement call in a tense and volatile situation.

Footage clearly shows she drove off when the agent had their hand on her door attempting to open it so the agent is 100% at risk/in danger at that moment and has effectively been attacked. Their response being proportionate to the risk will be examined now by the law
 
Last edited:
Danishfurniturelover said:
No right to defend themselves if a car is driven at them.

Was clear that as the car had been previously blocking their way that they were protestors. That then drove at them, can see why they tried to stop the threat, especially considering all the terror attacks where vehicles have been used.
Click to expand...
Quite the mental gymnast I see! The car was moving al at about 5mph and the guy was never on any real danger. And by the time he shot her he was horizontal to the drivers door ie well out of harms way.

This is cold blooded murder and should be treated as such
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
Well we already got Started here who cancels elections, locks people up for social media posts(only when British though) campaigns for terrorists to come here, the Egyptian chap from last week who said all police should be shot and wanted genocide to white people.

So yeah we are doing great.
Click to expand...
Not saying Starmer is good but he’s better than trump and farage.

The people who were locked up were locked up for inciting racial hatred which led to people trying to murder illegal migrants and attacking random black and brown people in the street.

My only regret is that they didn’t lock up the ringleaders like farage or Katie Hopkins

And yeah we should boot that Egyptian guy out straight away, there’s no place for his sort here
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back