Posted on 09/18/2021 10:49:12 AM PDT by Leaning Right
They should have charged the thug with First Degree Attempted Murder along with ALL the other Charges a regular citizen would receive and at no time should ANY Public Servant be Afforded Bail on a Felony Charge.
Now that we know the ROE - goes both ways.
A federal agent can now show up with a syringe in hand and jab any homeowner?
Does that include anyone in a military uniform?
Federal agent facing murder charges for shooting man outside Hawaii McDonald’s
Federal agent in Hawaii for work ‘shot dead unarmed man in McDonald’s because he was bullying people’
And after 3 mistrials, there will be no more. He got off.
Yes, you’re right. It was attempted murder. The federal officer involved was arrested. But nothing ever came of it.
And to make matters worse, the appeals court told the victim he could not sue the officer involved. Federal officers evidently have absolute immunity from lawsuits, even when they’re assaulting people while off-duty.
This should make the “back the blue” “law and order” crowd happy.
Guess what kind of employees Nancy’s personal police force falls under?
The ruling is outright wrong - immunity is for acts perpetrated while on duty - not personal ones which this one was and these judges need to be sacked.
The article doesn’t say if Lamb even identified himself as a Fed. He just drew his gun and began attacking.
Patriots are reminded that the powers that the states have given to the feds to police the states are expressly constitutionally very limited.
Regarding the mechanic shot by feds in an alleged private dispute, unless the State of Texas had formally requested federal assistance on this issue (yeah, right), the misguided (imo) appeals court judges, along with a wrongly silent Congress, are all helping to violate the Constitution's Article IV, Section 4 imo.
"Article IV, Section 4 (4.4): The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government [emphasis added], and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
In fact, Justice Joseph Story had warned us that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention had made 4.4 partly to help prevent the feds from dreaming up excuses to stick their big noses (my words) into sovereign state affairs.
”§ 1819. It may not be amiss further to observe, (in the language of another commentator,) that every pretext for intermeddling with the domestic concerns of any state, under colour of protecting it against domestic violence, is taken away by that part of the provision, which renders an application from the legislature, or executive authority of the state endangered necessary to be made to the general government, before its interference can be at all proper [emphasis added]. On the other hand, this article becomes an immense acquisition of strength, and additional force to the aid of any state government, in case of an internal rebellion, or insurrection against its authority. The southern states, being more peculiarly open to danger from this quarter, ought (he adds) to be particularly tenacious of a constitution, from which they may derive such assistance in the most critical periods.” —Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, Article 4, Section 4.
The ultimate remedy for unconstitutionally big, alleged election-stealing, Democratic Party-pirated federal and state governments oppressing everybody under their boots...
Consider that all the states can effectively “secede” from the unconstitutionally big federal government by doing the following.
Patriots need to primary federal and state elected officials who don't send voters email ASAP that clearly promises to do the following.
Federal and state lawmakers need to promise in their emails to introduce resolutions no later than 100 days after start of new legislative sessions that proposes an amendment to the Constitution to the states, the amendment limited to repealing the 16th and ill-conceived 17th Amendments.
Insights welcome.
Getting back to Ruby Ridge; I guess gunning down a woman holding a baby is just doing his job. The agent was not charged over that; shoots the family dog and kid etc all over the possibility the guy was allegedly wanting to sell a sawed off shotgun. That family wiped out by your government in action.
Not if I shoot him first in self defense. Shot against federal agents in shooting matches never saw but 2 were any good. One was a retired FBI firearms instructor and the other was and ATF agent.
...it’s coming to the Justices in the form of a petition from Kevin Byrd, a Texas mechanic who was almost shot to death by a federal officer in a dispute over a purely personal matter.
> Getting back to Ruby Ridge; I guess gunning down a woman holding a baby is just doing his job. <
Of course not. But the agent involved there can at least make that claim (as flimsy and as disgusting as that claim might be). The agent in this case cannot even make that claim.
Yet he is still immune from lawsuits.
They can kill and get away with it. They can always plant evidence, or claim the 80-year old unarmed man was trying to kill the agent.
What this court is saying has NOTHING to do with Qualified Immunity. This is taking immunity into a level probably never thought possible. And, as much as I loathe institutions like the ACLU, I’m hoping they’re swooping in.
Qualified Immunity offers protection against civil suits. Nothing more. It prevents people from going after an LEO, after an incident. If it’s determined that the LEO acted properly, within their departments training, within the law....they didn’t do anything wrong, then they’re are protected from being sued in civil court.
If they didn’t act properly, violated department training, acted in violation of the law, then they can be sued and in many, if not most, cases will probably be charged criminally.
What this court is saying, if I’m reading it right, is that Feds have immunity for EVERYTHING they do, on duty or off duty.
And therein lies the rub.
So, this court, like many others, just invented a law out of thin air to protect a federal agent. And if you think about it, by deciding ‘absolute immunity’ the court just gave a whole lot of wiggle room for what ‘absolute immunity’ is.
And, after reading the article, it’s insane that the court can come up with this decision. I could be wrong but it appears that the fed was off-duty, meaning that NONE of his ‘protections’ would even apply.
Amazing how they take care of one another. Curious to know who the original judges were in the case.
Interesting comment from a 5th Circuit Judge......
Federal Judge Don Willett, a Trump appointee to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, was outraged by his own court’s ruling.
“If you wear a federal badge, you can inflict excessive force on someone with little fear of liability,” Willett lamented in a March opinion as the appellate court, bound by prior rulings, blocked a lawsuit against a federal agent outside Houston who engaged in an appalling abuse of power.
“Middle-management circuit judges must salute smartly and follow precedent,” Willett added, even when that means “private citizens who are brutalized — even killed — by rogue federal officials” can find no relief in the courts.
The article is a little short on facts, is says nothing became of the charges, that tells me they didn’t even Prosecute. NOTHING prevents the State from Refiling First Degree Attempted Murder Charges against the thug, the question is why haven’t they? or does Texas Allow Attempted Murder if it’s a federal employee in civilian clothes actively to suppress information about his criminal son while off duty
Ghost guns have value.
Union government sure has a lot of power!
It’s just sick.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.