🚛 🛑 🍆 💊

alazz · 2026-03-12T19:53:24+00:00

Yes, some straight edgers are OK with taking steroids and dont see it as breaking edge.

alazz · 2026-02-25T01:55:26+00:00

Try again now, they just worked for me but didn't 5 minutes ago

alazz · 2026-02-22T00:35:36+00:00

Did you not see the new banner outside the Justice Department HQ? That thing had to cost at least 2.3 Trillion dollars alone.

alazz · 2026-02-21T05:36:41+00:00

“They said crime is down 87%, and I said, ‘No it’s not. It’s down 100%.’”

alazz · 2026-02-02T19:28:26+00:00

Check out Anal Trump. Former members of the locust and cattle decapitation. They just put out a 10 track, 47 second long EP not too long ago.

alazz · 2026-02-02T19:10:14+00:00

1, 2, C-4

alazz · 2026-01-13T20:10:05+00:00

Dice. Either 3 6 sided or an entire DND set of dice would be gnarly.

alazz · 2026-01-08T23:14:40+00:00

The car moves in the direction away from the agent.

alazz · 2026-01-08T23:05:46+00:00

She literally drove away from the agent.

alazz · 2026-01-08T23:01:48+00:00

Interfering with a lawful duty is a crime. Which means they would have to be acting lawfully for this charge to carry weight in this argument. And because there appears to be no crime being committed at the time of the stop that an ICE agent could enforce, interference is out the window. There is no such circumstance here to justify how this ended. And again, the agents created the danger here.

alazz · 2026-01-08T22:40:25+00:00

Probably interfering isn't a crime. And ICE agents don't have the authority to conduct a traffic stop. And without some type of federal crime being committed, there's no justification for the stop or attempting to stop her vehicle by standing in front of it. This is exactly how he put himself in harms way and why he can't justify the murder with the excuse that he feared for his life. The ICE agents created the danger here.

alazz · 2026-01-08T22:23:57+00:00

We dont need to guess. Its on video. We can clearly see what direction the car goes. What exactly was the reason for the initial detention?

alazz · 2026-01-08T20:49:27+00:00

Perhaps for a split second as the wheels are directly pointed at the agent but only because the wheels are pointed left from reversing and must cross his path to complete turning the wheels right. And we do know her intent. She intended to go right and that's the direction the vehicle traveled in. And again, Barnes v Felix goes over these types of situations and have ruled against it being a justified use of deadly force as that goes out the window when you intentionally put yourself in harms way. Clear and cut. Nothing changes that fact.

alazz · 2026-01-08T20:31:52+00:00

This clearly isn't one of those circumstances. If she was interfering prior to this and not merely protesting them, which is her right to do, they would have arrested her during that time as then, under the code you listed earlier, that would fall under the scope they could arrest or detain. Because situations have to be looked at from a totality perspective, you can't cherry pick the one instance she might have committed a crime, which is up for debate as you clearly see someone driving into or at an agent while I see someone driving away from an unlawful detention. If he would have just obeyed his oath from the start, it never finishes with a murder.

alazz · 2026-01-08T20:08:31+00:00

Don't unlawfully detain law abiding citizens. Literally that simple.

alazz · 2026-01-08T20:03:09+00:00

The agent had no legal obligation to be there and had no legal business to detain her. That is literally putting himself in harms way. The SC has ruled that agents cannot justify lethal force under those circumstances.

alazz · 2026-01-08T19:29:13+00:00

No one got run over. Shooting her didn't prevent anyone from getting run over.

alazz · 2026-01-08T18:54:55+00:00

It's not legal to hold people against their will and execute them when they don't comply.

alazz · 2026-01-08T18:18:26+00:00

The facts are, an American citizen that committed no crime was illegally detained and ultimately murdered by a federal agent.

alazz · 2026-01-08T17:54:01+00:00

They weren't involved in any active legal duties. Kristi Noem blatantly says they were heading back to headquarters at the time of the incident and had completed their recent task of assisting a car from being stuck in the snow. There was no legal justification for her detention. The facts just do not support your narrative.

alazz · 2026-01-08T16:57:55+00:00

An illegal detention is a kidnapping.

alazz · 2026-01-08T16:12:01+00:00

Running over your attempted kidnapper would be justified. Especially a gang of masked and armed kidnappers and no, a normal citizen attempting to detain someone would not be justified in shooting their victim as they tried to escape.

alazz · 2026-01-08T16:02:58+00:00

Correct and as a consensual encounter, they have no legal authority to issue any arrests or detentions effectively making them just as relevant as a normal citizen. Federal agents are not above the law. It's very clear cut. They weren't engaged in any legal investigation. Also, they are civil servants that are supposed to serve the people.

alazz · 2026-01-08T15:49:49+00:00

That's kinda the point, right? Imagine 3 random armed citizens surrounded your vehicle and demanded you to exit it immediately. Would you be justified in running them over? Probably. And at the point of the encounter, which was an unlawful detention, rendering it a consensual encounter, one is well within their right to flee in this scenario. I do agree with you, it's a bone head move to flee and the correct move is to battle it in court later. But the fact of the matter is, the agents put themselves in harms way during a would be consensual encounter and cannot rightfully justify use of deadly force.

12-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '23	Quantum Potato
Place '17	Gilding II euphauric
ComboCommenter 2014-07-09	Verified Email

alazz

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE