It is trigger-happy because there was no good reason to draw the weapon or shoot at all. Shooting the woman did not do anything to stop the car, to the contrary it resulted in the car accelerating and hitting another vehicle.
He could have stepped aside instead of drawing his weapon and there wouldn't have been any issue. He also shouldn't have walked around the car that way, that was entirely unnecessary and dangerous.
The woman is clearly distracted by the other ICE officer, that's just an all around dangerous situation they created entirely unnecessarily.
I think the 'good reason' he had was that 7 months ago he was dragged by a car, used a taser twice, and got roughed up.
He probably spent awhile in the hospital pondering what happened. He probably spent time talking to his ICE buddies. About his injuries. About using the taser. About how much he wished he had used his sidearm instead of his taser. And his buddies encouraging him. His buddies encouraging him, "next time don't be so kind with the tazer." He thought about what he would do "next time."
He was fantasizing about "punishing" the guy who dragged him. He fantasized about that for months. He "lost" the last fight and walked away with more injuries than the other guy. Got to even the score.
He evened the score. He won. And he will get away with it.
There is no Karma. He is victorious, and indeed, now placed upon the mantle by the administration as a hero who settled a score against "domestic terrorism."
Taking your framing at face value (I disagree that the videos show this, but lets assume they do). Does shooting someone who is operating a vehicle aimed at you "end the threat"? What happened after the officer shot the driver? Did the car become more or less controlled?
Your first argument was "he's not trigger happy, he only shot her 1 or 2 times" (it was 3 times, by the way). And he "did it in under a second". None of that means he is not trigger happy. Trigger happy means he is inclined to use his weapon in situations where it is unwarranted and may escalate the situation. That is exactly what happened. He turned a woman operating a car into a dead body operating a car on a public street. In no way did he handle the situation correctly.
Was she fleeing, or trying to use her car as a weapon?
> In any case you can watch a solid dozen video sources that show her reversing and targeting this office and hitting him.
I don't think that is true. I've watched a lot of the footage. I even watched enough to know how many bullets were fired! That seems like more knowledge than you possess of the situation.
Last question: Do you believe this woman is a domestic terrorist?
Is there a threat created afterwards by a car being piloted by a corpse or no? If the car is being piloted by a corpse, why did it not continue on course and run over the ICE agent standing "in front of the car"?
In any case you can watch a solid dozen video sources that show her reversing and targeting this office and hitting him.
No, you cannot, because that's not what happened. Look at the angle of her front tires. You don't steer right when you're trying to run down someone standing to your left.
She was not targeting him, she was backing up to turn to leave. Onlookers have stated the same thing we can all see in the videos. She wasn't a dangerous felon, that's state propaganda. And no, shooting a fleeing vehicle is not proper enforcement.
Not judging your reply, but my understanding of the meaning of the word ‘trigger happy’ is that the shooter is too hasty in deciding to fire, and has nothing to do with their skill or accuracy.
I never mentioned a vehicle, let's stay with the hypothetical. Is the cop who fired a single shot into someones head because they were startled by a hiccup "trigger happy"? Or do they need to "mag dump" for the term to apply?
The car accelerated after she was shot and hit another parked car down the road. It could have been a bystander. It was an out of control vehicle, that's why LE is trained not to shoot a moving vehicle.
"Trigger happy" means an affinity to shoot with little or no provocation. Effectiveness with a weapon is unrelated. This is absolutely the definition of trigger happy.
The officer chose to engage and close on the vehicle and chose to circle from the front. If the officer was concerned about being run over, they shouldn't have stood right at the bumper. The car was clearly in gear, moving forward was an obvious expectation.
Did the officer have an escape route? Obviously yes, since they only had to side step to avoid the car. Was there an exigent circumstance? No, the officer could have retreated and nobody else was clearly in harm's way. Was the driver clearly a threat? Again, no.
No, this was straight-up murder from a trigger happy psychopath.
I think there is a disconnect in meanings of trigger-happy. Yours seems to be what people familiar with guns mean, and the other was colloquial “too willing to use a gun.” So you disputed both meanings, but you’re not going to persuade the other side by saying he was actually very trained and skillful in what they see as an unjustified killing. (Not really taking a side personally as I haven’t watched or read much about the death.)
Having watched the videos now, he appears to shoot 2 rounds through the drivers window, after whatever amount of personal danger he was in while in front. That seems closer to mag dumping and poor discipline than not.
So it ultimately comes down to you pretending that you're the ICE officer in this scenario and that you're a heroic upholder of law that killed a violent felon, considering your other comments here. I shouldn't be surprised that you would feel particularly proud about killing a mother under the vaguest and false pretense of a threat.
Your comment jumping to my personal upbringing is uncalled for and not in keeping with hacker news standing and shows you are the morally/intellectually weak one when it comes to this discussion, but you are a moron if you think you can infer where someone grew up or what they have been through because they don't think LAW ENFORCEMENT should behave with PERSONAL MALICE when killing someone.
Thank you for your analysis. This is the kind of nuanced discourse I come to this internet forum for.
If nothing else, I do hope that everyone involved gets the help and care they deserve. Post-trauma depression is a real thing and diagnosis is sketchy at best.
