There is a line where, on one side, law enforcement is allowed to shoot at a moving car, and on the other side, they are not.
It seems to me (as a layman) that this incident is right on that line. There are forensics and legal experts who say it was a just shooting and others who say it wasn't.
I realize most people are going to default to their "team's" opinion on this, but when the people who are in the field can't agree, maybe this is truly an either/or situation.
I don’t know whether such a ruling is dispositive as to suit against the agency and the officer. He may have governmental immunity absent negligent or reckless behavior.
in front of the car, thereby causing an unnecessary danger and turning a traffic issue into a homicide.
(I wish I had saved it; of course now I can't find it.) There is no prohibition on standing in front of a stopped car.
...here's an excerpt from the attached guidelines...Note that this event was all about blocking traffic and tooting of horns...with a little taunting of the ICE officers...NONE of which rise to the need for deadly force...AND...if Ms. Ross really wanted to harm Officer Ross with her car, she would have turned LEFT in order to be sure she hit him...BUT...she turned hard RIGHT away from him...'Common Sense' should tell you she meant no harm.
-----------------------
5. Customs and Border Patrol, Use of Force Policy (January 2021) [4500-002A]
Chapter 1: General Guidelines
…
C. Use of Safe Tactics
…
2. Except where otherwise required by inspections or other operations, Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid standing directly in front of or behind a subject vehicle. Officers/agents should not place themselves in the path of a moving vehicle or use their body to block a vehicle’s path.
3. Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid intentionally and unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no alternative to using deadly force.
-------------------
Link: https://www.justsecurity.org/128498/dhs-doj-cbp-policy-force-vehicles/
(no message)
Everyone would probably agree that a car can be dangerously weaponized.
In this case, though, it wasn't. One step to the right would have removed the danger.
And the two shots though the side window - when he was no longer in front of the car - are hard to explain for the "self-defense!" people.
ICE agents are people too, many of them have families to go home to as well. The ICE agent was doing his job, that's why he was there. Why was she there?
But on only one side of this equation was a (supposedly) highly trained law enforcement professional.
He should not have killed her. Not that complicated.
(no message)
in order to leave...even if failing to get out of the car, deadly force is not approved by CBP/ICE Policy.
(no message)
or persons is warranted...read the information I've provided. This was a traffic and noise making problem...neither is a capital offense.
Don't be so dismissive of Ms. Good being unnecessarily killed by an ICE officer who violated. his organization's policies.
(no message)
people's posts?...you get unnecessarily 'animated'...and look foolish as well...don't do that.
(no message)
supposed to go...
(no message)
(no message)
definitely not firing at vehicles...or people within.
Don't waste time trying to re-write their manual.
btw, the material I've already provided notes that officers who fire at vehicles put other officers and bystanders in danger...e.g. missed shots...ricochets...and careening vehicles with injured or dead drivers ploughing into bystanders...imagine if a bicyclist or Mom walking her baby on the sidewalk got hit...as Renee's car did when it smashed into other vehicles on the side of the road.
Consent Management