—> ICE / Immigration / Federal agents shoot two people in Portland

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 4K
  • Views: 133K
  • Politics 
There is zero doubt that this was a bad shoot.
But the decedent victim was not a bystander driving their kid to school as has been repeated here a few times. She didn't deserve to be shot or killed and again a bad shoot. But she made more that one bad decision and intentionally put herself into a position of conflict with ICE.
But, but, but...stfu.
 
So I am criticizing ICE for inciting a confrontation that invited the use of lethal force. That goes both ways, she invited a confrontation with armed ICE officers who show little respect or regard for civilian protesters. When that confrontation went sideways, her fight or flight reaction lead to the lethal response.

I know you are not really involved with the civil side of the law, but this is what we would consider to be comparative negligence.
Also, corporate law is civil law. I don't do torts, if that's what you are asking. But I also know what negligence is and this ain't it.

Comparative negligence isn't even remotely the right framework. That would imply that the officer was negligent. He was not. He committed murder. He wasn't partly at fault. He was entirely at fault. He didn't do something "objectively unreasonable." He intended to kill her. There is no court in the country that would find any negligence on her part because it's not even remotely the right framework for analysis. I get that you do insurance claims and you probably know a fair amount about that but this is outside your bailiwick, I'm afraid.
 
I know you are not really involved with the civil side of the law, but this is what we would consider to be comparative negligence.
I'm not sure why this response is making me furious but it is. I will stand on what I have already posted rather than pile on, but I confess it find it really grating.
 
Back
Top