Renee Good's family sues Trump administration over fatal Minneapolis shooting

Fleeing the scene of a misdemeanor is another misdemeanor.
She was committing a felony.
She compounded it by driving her vehicle to injure or kill a federal officer, another felony.
She attempted to flee, another felony.

Anyway, all of this begs the question, which is: was lethal force in that circumstance lawful?
Yes.
Let's have a jury decide. An argument for the Estate may be that, having shot her twice already, it likely wasn't necessary to put a third bullet in her, this final one through the temple, in order to stop her from driving the car.
If you try to run over a cop or otherwise cause one to use his gun, he will quite probably empty his magazine at you.
There are also the threshold questions of whether it's ever reasonable to shoot someone fleeing the scene of a misdemeanor and whether it's ever reasonable to shoot the driver of a car who is carrying a passenger.
She was committing a felony, tried to run over a federal officer with her car as another felony, and tried to flee (another felony).
The passenger had also committed a felony.
 
My only support for undocumented immigrants is the "support" we traditionally gave them in allowing them to live here peacefully and productively, encouraging them to obtain citizenship in the traditional American way. Try to be an American, Earl.
Illegal immigration is a crime, Marty. They are immediately subject to deportation.
 
Striking that officer, intentionally or not, turned it into a felony. Had she not been shot and drove away, that's felony hit and run (leaving the scene of an accident). On top of that, she was fleeing arrest. That too turns it into a felony.
Intentionally blocking federal officers conducting an arrest and transport of a prisoner is also a felony.
 
His own video shows you are being disingenuous with your claim. You keep moving in the shortest distance to no longer be in front.
There ya go denying physics again.
Cars may have steering wheels but how far they can turn is restricted. It must go forward in order to turn. If you are near the left side of a vehicle and it is 6 feet away from you you continue moving in that direction. The turning radius on a Honda Pilot is about 19 feet. It can't move to the side.
No one said it did, Poorboy.
But then we also see that Ross's viewpoint clearly shows her turning the steering wheel away from him.
Irrelevant. Honda Pilot vehicles don't move sideways.
Making your argument even sillier. Was Ross suddenly blind? Cars don't turn the opposite direction of the steering wheel.
Irrelevant. Honda Pilot vehicles don't move sideways.
You failed to answer the context question
There is no context question.
of why was he was walking in front of her vehicle and using his cell phone?
RQAA
You are the one that claimed we needed to include all the context and now you are avoiding including context.
Fallacy fallacy. No 'context' involved here.
Why Ross was even in front of her vehicle is very important to this since it shows that Ross is the one that put himself in danger in violation of his training.
It is not in violation of any training, Poorboy.
Then you want to talk acceleration. A Honda Pilot is not some speed demon.
A Honda Pilot has a top speed of 130mph. This 230hp engine can accelerate a Honda Pilot from 0-60 in 7.8 seconds.
Want to get hit with one at that speed?
The Honda Pilot weights 4770 lbs, plus fuel, driver and passenger, bringing the total weight at the time to approx 5200lbs.

Do you want to get hit with a 5200lb object traveling 10-20mph?

It takes almost 2 seconds for it to go from 0-20 mph.
And in about 2 seconds he was being hit. Do YOU want to get hit with a 5200lb object going 20mph?
Using a speed calculator it takes roughly 10 feet to get up to 10mph.
Argument from randU fallacy. From a standing start, you can easily get a Honda Pilot up to 10-20mph in a VERY short space.
Would YOU want to get hit with a 5200lb object traveling at 5mph?

That would be under ideal conditions. This was icy conditions. She didn't even move 10 feet before Ross shot her.
She actually did. That's less than the length of the car.
Would YOU want to get hit with a 5200lb object traveling at 5mph?
 
Do you know what a 3 point turn is? I would guess over 90% of adults in Minnesota understand what it is. When you back up with your wheels aimed to the left the front of your vehicle moves right. This caused Ross to be less in front of her vehicle and made it easier for him to move to his right and avoid being hit. Her actions caused her vehicle to be less aimed at him.

Fact: She is obviously turning her steering wheel to the right as she starts to move forward.

Once again, you fail to address why Ross was in front of her car at all.
She did not back up. She accelerated into a federal officer with a 5200lb car. Honda Pilot vehicles do not travel sideways.
It does not matter why Ross was in front of the car.
 
She was committing a felony.
She compounded it by driving her vehicle to injure or kill a federal officer, another felony.
She attempted to flee, another felony.


Yes.

If you try to run over a cop or otherwise cause one to use his gun, he will quite probably empty his magazine at you.

She was committing a felony, tried to run over a federal officer with her car as another felony, and tried to flee (another felony).
The passenger had also committed a felony.
The dimwit begins his merry dance.
 
OMG, professor stupid is babbling again.

1) FYI the meaning of "how long" is not "long" you fuckin' twit.

Eg, if someone says "How long is the dinner table?" that doesn't mean that the dinner table is long.

When I said "She was going very fast considering how long she had to accelerate", the net effect of that sentence is to suggest the exact opposite of "long". It means that "her car gained a lot of velocity over a short distance". That means that she was accelerating as quickly as possible. That means that the engine was making a loud noise, and it looked like the car was being used as a weapon.

2) The car was not accelerating anymore after it hit him. It went the same speed for the whole time after it passed him.

That's because the strength of the return spring on a vehicle's gas pedal is set by the manufacturers to be high enough to ensure that muscular effort is required to accelerate a vehicle.
After being shot, the car continued to accelerate. The driver is dead. She could no longer lift her foot from the accelerator. The weight of the dead foot continued to press on the accelerator. The car finally stopped when it hit a stationary object.

These idiots just don't appreciate getting hit by 5200lbs worth of vehicle moving at even 5mph can do to you.
There HAVE been incidents of people being killed by a much lighter vehicle hitting them at only 5mph.

F=mA. The force exerted on a 200lb by a 5200lb vehicle means the man is going to get injured or killed.
Ross was lucky. He only got injured. He also managed to draw his gun AND make an excellent shot while dodging the car.
 
Last edited:
Tell me that you don't have a fucking clue without actually saying that you don't have a fucking clue.

In this context acceleration is everything, because high acceleration points to intent and danger.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKjxFJfcrcA
280hp in a 5200lb vehicle aimed right at Ross, with an acceleration of 6444N, which could result in 233 ft/s acceleration to Ross's body.
Easily done by a Honda Pilot in the distances involved, and even using much less horsepower to do it (about 20hp).

So he shot her in self defense, and to stop a fleeing felon.
 
The fact that the agent was "directly adjacent" to the car when Goode began to drive away cancels any claim based on the vehicle's "sudden acceleration" in his direction, spurring him into a burst of self defensive gunfire. He would NOT have had time in that scenario to even draw a gun nor would drawing a gun have been a normal instinctive reaction. He would have stepped or jumped out of the way, but the closeness of the car may not have allowed enough time even for that. It appears from the video that the car began gradually to move way, pulling to the right to avoid him but possibly brushing him as it did. The agent drew his gun and began shooting. He was then at the front side of the car causing the first shot to enter the windshield at its bottom left corner, the next two shots going through the driver's open side window as the car went by him.
p.s. three shots fired in anger.
 
Why do y'all argue with this shitbird? The video proves he is lying. She was moving away from the Trump gestapo when the guy killed her. WHen all these criminals running the country into the ground are gone maybe we can get justice for the dead and now the guy with a broken arm.
 
Velocity happens at impact. The two masses accelerate or decelerate at that point in time. When a mass is in motion at a constant speed no force is exerted on it.

You never took physics. Transfer of energy happens on impact. That can be elastic or inelastic. Velocity is what is imparted on mass.

As for your last sentence, I suggest you go out and jump in front of a truck or car on an interstate moving at a constant speed and see how much force (energy) you absorb.
 
You never took physics. Transfer of energy happens on impact. That can be elastic or inelastic. Velocity is what is imparted on mass.

As for your last sentence, I suggest you go out and jump in front of a truck or car on an interstate moving at a constant speed and see how much force (energy) you absorb.

Getting lost in the weeds.
 
Why do y'all argue with this shitbird? The video proves he is lying. She was moving away from the Trump gestapo when the guy killed her. WHen all these criminals running the country into the ground are gone maybe we can get justice for the dead and now the guy with a broken arm.
Yes, it would be nice if the radical Left ceased to exist.
 
I am curious how that bullet entered her left temple and exited the other side. Was it a magic bullet?

there were three gunshots on Good's body. There was one shot in her left forearm, one through her right breast, and one in the left side of her temple that exited on the other side.
look to the right and cough.
 
Nice source,,, If you had bothered to take a minute or two to look before you jumped you would have learned video analysis proves the car was turning away from, not toward, the agent.
turning through.

the radius of the turn would have put her turning through the cop.
 
turning through.

the radius of the turn would have put her turning through the cop.
"turning through" what?

Your "radius" comment makes sense only if you know the relative positions of the car and the cop and assume the cop's position remained fixed from the time the car began to move. In other words, you don't know what you're talking about.
 
Back
Top