He’s been caught repeatedly agitating, assaulting, and damaging federal property while armed. Yes that does mean he escalated to a level that qualifies lethal force under OIC.
It’s the metric you use to determine when lethal force is applicable. Opportunity, intent, capability, this is also waived if someone meets other metrics, forcing a safeguard is one.
pardon my semantics, but they are federal law enforcement working under ICE. for me that falls under the definition of a cop.
thank you for clarifying OIC, lets examine the situation through that lense:
Opportunity: Pretti was indeed present with a gun and had the opportunity to fire on officers multiple times if he so chose.
Capability: Pretti was armed with multiple magazines and certainly had the capability of inflicting massive damage.
Intent: pretty had multiple opportunities to draw and fire on officers, including the moment when officers were busy with the people he was originally filming. instead of drawing or firing, he physically obstructed the officers with his hands up. Pretti has a history of violent language and vandalizing officer's cars, but none of his actions directly before the shooting indicate any intent by him to use deadly force. as a matter of fact, the footage of his previous encounter with ice where he kicked the tail light he was shouting "assault me!" which indicates his intent in these encounters is to provoke a response from ice, not to kill or maim them.
That’s not how intent works. You’re making up conditions in your head because you heard a word and think that word means however you define it. Intent is intentionally being armed and escalating conflict, a suicide bomber doesn’t have to pull out the trigger button to be shot, he has to put himself, intentionally, in a position to harm others. Quit pretending you understand how engagement works, you clearly don’t.
He’s been caught repeatedly agitating, assaulting, and damaging federal property while armed. Yes that does mean he escalated to a level that qualifies lethal force under OIC.
what is this OIC you keep referencing? nearest relevant thing I can find on the internet is "officer in charge"
It’s the metric you use to determine when lethal force is applicable. Opportunity, intent, capability, this is also waived if someone meets other metrics, forcing a safeguard is one.
patently false
They’re not cops. OIC is different and people forcing safeguards most certainly one.
pardon my semantics, but they are federal law enforcement working under ICE. for me that falls under the definition of a cop.
thank you for clarifying OIC, lets examine the situation through that lense:
Opportunity: Pretti was indeed present with a gun and had the opportunity to fire on officers multiple times if he so chose.
Capability: Pretti was armed with multiple magazines and certainly had the capability of inflicting massive damage.
Intent: pretty had multiple opportunities to draw and fire on officers, including the moment when officers were busy with the people he was originally filming. instead of drawing or firing, he physically obstructed the officers with his hands up. Pretti has a history of violent language and vandalizing officer's cars, but none of his actions directly before the shooting indicate any intent by him to use deadly force. as a matter of fact, the footage of his previous encounter with ice where he kicked the tail light he was shouting "assault me!" which indicates his intent in these encounters is to provoke a response from ice, not to kill or maim them.
OIC false flat on Intent
That’s not how intent works. You’re making up conditions in your head because you heard a word and think that word means however you define it. Intent is intentionally being armed and escalating conflict, a suicide bomber doesn’t have to pull out the trigger button to be shot, he has to put himself, intentionally, in a position to harm others. Quit pretending you understand how engagement works, you clearly don’t.