Videos from the scene and its aftermath call into question two aspects of the D.H.S. description of events: Mr. Villegas-Gonzalez is not shown hitting either officer with his car; and, in the aftermath, one of the officers says his own injuries are “nothing major.”

all 18 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 53 points 10 months ago

Seriously. He could not have disengaged more gently. This is the straight up murder I mention every so often.

  • source
  • [–] 38 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    So, they shot because they were fearing for their safety?

    And they shot from behind the car, through the back window, while the car was driving away from both of them.
    Okay.

    What was the threat they were trying to stay from?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 10 months ago

    What was the threat they were trying to stay from?

    • Hurt feelings from not having their authority respected.
    • Being reprimanded for not meeting their monthly arrest quota.
    • The idea that they might eventually be the minorities.

    Take your pick.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    where’s all these second amendment defenders to save the day?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -27 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Most of them are fascist.

    But, assuming you’re a US citizen, the second amendment applies to you too, not just fascists.

    So where are you? Defenseless in the face of fascism? Letting down the rest of us like most of my fellow (yes, fellow) Democrats?? Leaving us alone lazily and expecting us to go die on your behalf?

    Fuck you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    We’ll definitely overthrow the fascists with your gloriously unifying attitude.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Have you tried politely asking fascists to stop? You honestly can't overthrow them without guns, and MAGA overwhelmingly own more guns because the left has demonized ownership and/or training with firearms for the past 30 years

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Where did I say anything about guns? I was hinting maybe the dude would like to start a discussion without resorting straight to the asshole card.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    Violence is not the answer, but MAGA would definitely disagree with that sentiment. So much so, that they have been radicalized by the recent events to be bloodthirsty and eager to kill one of us Lefties without consequence

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    MAGA warriors just are the loudest preachers, push come to shove.. and when one of their own actually does something they distance themselves from him ASAP to appease the god emperor and the cult following.

    but of course they tend to go after the unarmed kids and adults in schools and churches though cause they won’t shoot back.

    Based on government and independent analyses, right-wing extremist violence has been responsible for the overwhelming majority of fatalities, amounting to approximately 75% to 80% of U.S. domestic terrorism deaths since 2001.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

    there’s those who touted the second amendment and those who don’t. i’m asking about the loudest ones rocking ARs and multi gun collections with camo and armour and full gear and every gun accessory on earth. those who raise their kids shooting machines of war, frequently.

    step it up brother. my glock only gonna do so much versus your arsenal. also didn’t preach second amendment like it’s the first. step it up.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 10 months ago* (2 children)

    Right after the article mentions their rules of engagement in that situation being that they should have backed away from the moving car, it then states that the action would likely be considered justified due to the officer being in danger.... from choosing to hold on to the moving car? Like his injuries are clearly because he didn't let go of the car until it was going fast enough that he fell off and skidded... that seems like his choice and not something the driver did.

    They are not authorised or recommended to use force to prevent a "suspect" from fleeing.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago*

    Oh, more USA gov agencies now on at-will public executions.

    They are trying to kill/privatise the Post Office bcs they don't wanna do that prob.

  • source
  • [+] 1 point 10 months ago