Posted on 01/14/2026 8:59:59 AM PST by Jan_Sobieski
Whoopsie. Look what Tampon Tim signed into law back in 2020. As the circus over the George Floyd protests raged on, Minnesota’s Legislature updated its “use-of-force” statute, and Gov. Walz signed it into law that July.
Well, well, well…Look what Tim Walz signed into law in 2020: MN law §609.066: Officers can use deadly force if a driver accelerates toward them, creating immediate life-threatening danger. No need to wait for impact—they can act based on apparent intent & proximity. JUSTIFIED.
It’s real. Under Minnesota Statute 609.066, peace officers may use deadly force only when a reasonable officer believes it’s necessary to protect against death or great bodily harm. And it’s all based on the totality of circumstances known at the moment, not some hindsight debate after the fact…
(Excerpt) Read more at revolver.news ...
The law was poorly written. It’s full of contradiction.
some crazy 83 year old lady hit my parked car in a parking lot, refused to give me her name and ins info and said she was leaving.
I told her that would be hit and run and she did wait around for the cops to show up.
as soon as the cops left she hit my car again on purpose.
I told her to go back into the parking space while I called the car again and walked out into the middle of the parking lot about 20 feet away from her car in the direction I thought she might try to leave in.
Instead of waiting for the cops to show up again she accelerated toward me and did not stop. I jumped and ended up on the hood of her prius as she kept driving until she got to a main road.
I hit the windshield as hard as I could with my fist and was about to do it again when she put her car in reverse and threw me off.
The cops did nothing cause she was an old lady and there were no witnesses or cameras.
then a month later she ran over some nails and blamed me because why not. Despite the fact I was 30 miles away and had proof I was found guilty of harassing her by a dyke pro tem judge who refused to recuse herself and said that the old lady cried during her testimony so I must be guilty.
I did not have my pistol, and am still not sure if I should or would have shot her if I had.
s/should be/shouldn’t be/
Ice are fed govt employees action was in performance of their duties
I don’t believe it actually says anything specially about cars...
As long as it’s a “white male” that law is not applicable
Has the issue of whether or not a Presidential pardon encompasses all, including state convictions, ever been litigated? I would think it would make it to the USSC eventually, and be plenty political and provocative in the process.
Too many attacks; too few shot.
The officer didn’t move; what put him in the car’s way was the gal backing the car up - and then hitting the accelerator while looking straight at him, only turning the wheel after she spun out on ice. That officer certainly - and possibly the officer whose arm was in the window as well, like the shooting officer had experienced less than a year earlier - would be dead today if that wheel had not spun out on the ice.
All that officer could know was that there was a car pointed right at him with a crazy woman who all morning had been committing felonies with every move she made looking straight at him and slamming on the accelerator.
If that isn’t justification, I don’t know what is.
Sorry if I came on to strong
Yeah, just let crazy do what they wat! Good plan!
It’s just common sense to do what the nice officer asks you to THE FIRST TIME.
No problem. Happy to clarify.
The law specifically says “peace officers.” Section 626.84 defines peace officers as being licensed by the Board of Peace Officer Standards and Training. This may not include ICE agents.
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.