this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2026
751 points (98.8% liked)

Microblog Memes

10146 readers
1983 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] village604@adultswim.fan 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I mean even if she was aiming her car at the pig that murdered her it's still illegal to just shoot unarmed criminals.

The problem with this sentiment is that motor vehicles can and have been used as lethal weapons before.

This absolutely isn't a defense of ICE murdering a person, but there are definitely instances where use of lethal force on a driver with no other weapons is warranted.

This wasn't one of those instances, though.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Although police are evidently trained not to fire into a moving vehicle. If the vehicle is a danger, you have to use another vehicle to stop it. If on foot, just stay out of the way of possible danger (which the guy also screwed up by walking toward being in front of the vehicle).

See what happened in this case, when he killed her, did that stop the car? No it sent the car accelerating uncontrolled down the road until colliding with a parked car stopped it. No amount of shooting the car would have stopped it or made it less likely to hit him.

Using a car to stop another car, yeah, they do that (and it's risky enough as it is), but don't shoot into a moving car, the risk is just too high.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

My point is that a person behind the wheel of a car isn't harmless.

The fact that it's not harmless is what negates the terrorist's claim of self defense because he intentionally positioned himself in front of it. He wouldn't have been in any danger if he took literally two steps to the right.

But I don't disagree with anything you said, I'm just clarifying my point. Well, I disagree with calling ICE law enforcement.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Of course, I never called ICE law enforcement, I just said that police are trained on this matter, I don't think ICE is even vaguely trained

[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yep, I completely agree.
The pigs are trained to not stand in front of cars, I mean most children are taught at a very young age to not do that.

The only reasons for that murderer to circle then stand in front of her car are that he has less intelligence than most children, or he wanted to escalate things so he could pull his gun out and shoot someone.
Both could be true, but the latter is most likely.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 1 points 2 days ago

Exactly. The terrorist was creating a situation in which he could murder.

I just take issue with the notion that a person behind the wheel of a multi ton death machine is harmless. They're not harmless, which is why intentionally standing in front of the vehicle negates the ICE agent's claim of self defense.