Sonia Sotomayor's bodyguard shoots armed carjacker outside of justice's NW DC home

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gosh what a dumpy neighborhood... makes the Supreme Court look like a letdown.

I guffaw at all you old biddies ridiculing the neighborhood Sotomayor lives in. She's a non-white woman who grew up in the Bronx, can't imagine why she'd find a Class A building located in one of the District's most diverse and exciting neighborhoods appealing. This woman has achieved so much more in her life than you losers, who simply chose the right cock to hop on. Get bent, douchebags.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These takes are weird.

The Marshalls were sitting in a vehicle that almost certainly belongs to the US government (not Sotomayor) when a person approached the vehicle and pointed a gun at them through the window. We don't know if words were exchanged. At some point the Marshalls fired on him. He lived.

He wasn't trying to steal Sotomayor's car and they didn't shoot him to protect her. They shot him because he *was threatening them with a gun.* They shot him before he could shoot them. They were not going to give up the vehicle to him (and they aren't required to omg) and he was absolutely engaged in threatening behavior that justified the use of force.

What other outcome can you imagine that makes sense? Two armed federal Marshalls allow themselves to be shot by a carjacker while keeping guns holstered? They step out of the vehicle and let this idiot take it? Does either of those scenarios make any sense?

Yes. The should have let the guys go. They could’ve retrieved the car after they totaled it like everyone else does

+1

No one is above the law.

If the law of DC says, STFU while carjacked, why is Sotomayor any different.

Especially Sotomayor, who opposes gun rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was a mostly peaceful carjacking.

That was going to be the case until Sotomayor's bodyguard started shooting around.

Should we all be doing the same? Can I get a gun tomorrow to protect my car and family?

If I lived there I would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These takes are weird.

The Marshalls were sitting in a vehicle that almost certainly belongs to the US government (not Sotomayor) when a person approached the vehicle and pointed a gun at them through the window. We don't know if words were exchanged. At some point the Marshalls fired on him. He lived.

He wasn't trying to steal Sotomayor's car and they didn't shoot him to protect her. They shot him because he *was threatening them with a gun.* They shot him before he could shoot them. They were not going to give up the vehicle to him (and they aren't required to omg) and he was absolutely engaged in threatening behavior that justified the use of force.

What other outcome can you imagine that makes sense? Two armed federal Marshalls allow themselves to be shot by a carjacker while keeping guns holstered? They step out of the vehicle and let this idiot take it? Does either of those scenarios make any sense?

Yes. The should have let the guys go. They could’ve retrieved the car after they totaled it like everyone else does

That would have jeopardized their ability to do their job -- it's not like they can just take a break from protection to call Uber and run back to headquarters for another vehicle.

Also it is not clear that they shot him to prevent him from taking the vehicle. One of the problems with this scenario is that these guys knew they were armed law enforcement on duty but the carjacker almost certainly didn't. That makes the situation even more charged than it might be if they were just unarmed laypeople -- if at some point he'd seen their weapons and gotten spooked he might be more likely to shoot. That may in fact have been what happened -- he carjacks them unknowingly then realizes they are armed cops and they shoot him before he can do anything even dumber than he's already done. If they'd been regular people the danger of him realizing they have the ability to kill him isn't there and they can more easily just exit the vehicle and let him take it.

They also might have been trigger happy cops. That happens too. But the point is that the scenario cannot play out the way it does with "everyone else" because they fact that they are cops and are armed changes the entire dynamic in a way that makes it more dangerous for all involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gosh what a dumpy neighborhood... makes the Supreme Court look like a letdown.

I guffaw at all you old biddies ridiculing the neighborhood Sotomayor lives in. She's a non-white woman who grew up in the Bronx, can't imagine why she'd find a Class A building located in one of the District's most diverse and exciting neighborhoods appealing. This woman has achieved so much more in her life than you losers, who simply chose the right cock to hop on. Get bent, douchebags.

Lol, that condo is classic gentrification. She could have bought a whole giant house in Hillcrest, hmmm …

anyway, what’s clear is that she fell into the same trap as a lot of ex-New Yorkers: believing that there’s a neighborhood anything like NYC in DC. She bought the condo in 2012, which was the height of the U St upswing with new development and historically low crime.

she would have been much better off buying on the Hill, and closer to work, instead of going for “hip” and “urban.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These takes are weird.

The Marshalls were sitting in a vehicle that almost certainly belongs to the US government (not Sotomayor) when a person approached the vehicle and pointed a gun at them through the window. We don't know if words were exchanged. At some point the Marshalls fired on him. He lived.

He wasn't trying to steal Sotomayor's car and they didn't shoot him to protect her. They shot him because he *was threatening them with a gun.* They shot him before he could shoot them. They were not going to give up the vehicle to him (and they aren't required to omg) and he was absolutely engaged in threatening behavior that justified the use of force.

What other outcome can you imagine that makes sense? Two armed federal Marshalls allow themselves to be shot by a carjacker while keeping guns holstered? They step out of the vehicle and let this idiot take it? Does either of those scenarios make any sense?

Yes. The should have let the guys go. They could’ve retrieved the car after they totaled it like everyone else does

That would have jeopardized their ability to do their job -- it's not like they can just take a break from protection to call Uber and run back to headquarters for another vehicle.

Also it is not clear that they shot him to prevent him from taking the vehicle. One of the problems with this scenario is that these guys knew they were armed law enforcement on duty but the carjacker almost certainly didn't. That makes the situation even more charged than it might be if they were just unarmed laypeople -- if at some point he'd seen their weapons and gotten spooked he might be more likely to shoot. That may in fact have been what happened -- he carjacks them unknowingly then realizes they are armed cops and they shoot him before he can do anything even dumber than he's already done. If they'd been regular people the danger of him realizing they have the ability to kill him isn't there and they can more easily just exit the vehicle and let him take it.

They also might have been trigger happy cops. That happens too. But the point is that the scenario cannot play out the way it does with "everyone else" because they fact that they are cops and are armed changes the entire dynamic in a way that makes it more dangerous for all involved.

OK, so then you're saying they shouldn't even there to be with, or at the very least not be armed.

Sotomayor has the same right to a peaceful carjacking like the rest of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These takes are weird.

The Marshalls were sitting in a vehicle that almost certainly belongs to the US government (not Sotomayor) when a person approached the vehicle and pointed a gun at them through the window. We don't know if words were exchanged. At some point the Marshalls fired on him. He lived.

He wasn't trying to steal Sotomayor's car and they didn't shoot him to protect her. They shot him because he *was threatening them with a gun.* They shot him before he could shoot them. They were not going to give up the vehicle to him (and they aren't required to omg) and he was absolutely engaged in threatening behavior that justified the use of force.

What other outcome can you imagine that makes sense? Two armed federal Marshalls allow themselves to be shot by a carjacker while keeping guns holstered? They step out of the vehicle and let this idiot take it? Does either of those scenarios make any sense?

Yes. The should have let the guys go. They could’ve retrieved the car after they totaled it like everyone else does

That would have jeopardized their ability to do their job -- it's not like they can just take a break from protection to call Uber and run back to headquarters for another vehicle.

Also it is not clear that they shot him to prevent him from taking the vehicle. One of the problems with this scenario is that these guys knew they were armed law enforcement on duty but the carjacker almost certainly didn't. That makes the situation even more charged than it might be if they were just unarmed laypeople -- if at some point he'd seen their weapons and gotten spooked he might be more likely to shoot. That may in fact have been what happened -- he carjacks them unknowingly then realizes they are armed cops and they shoot him before he can do anything even dumber than he's already done. If they'd been regular people the danger of him realizing they have the ability to kill him isn't there and they can more easily just exit the vehicle and let him take it.

They also might have been trigger happy cops. That happens too. But the point is that the scenario cannot play out the way it does with "everyone else" because they fact that they are cops and are armed changes the entire dynamic in a way that makes it more dangerous for all involved.

You forgot the obvious: they had to assume that he might be a threat to Sotomayor. Obviously, taking out her protection makes it easier to get to her. They couldn’t just let him go, how absurd b

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gosh what a dumpy neighborhood... makes the Supreme Court look like a letdown.

I guffaw at all you old biddies ridiculing the neighborhood Sotomayor lives in. She's a non-white woman who grew up in the Bronx, can't imagine why she'd find a Class A building located in one of the District's most diverse and exciting neighborhoods appealing. This woman has achieved so much more in her life than you losers, who simply chose the right cock to hop on. Get bent, douchebags.

This made me laugh. It’s so true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These takes are weird.

The Marshalls were sitting in a vehicle that almost certainly belongs to the US government (not Sotomayor) when a person approached the vehicle and pointed a gun at them through the window. We don't know if words were exchanged. At some point the Marshalls fired on him. He lived.

He wasn't trying to steal Sotomayor's car and they didn't shoot him to protect her. They shot him because he *was threatening them with a gun.* They shot him before he could shoot them. They were not going to give up the vehicle to him (and they aren't required to omg) and he was absolutely engaged in threatening behavior that justified the use of force.

What other outcome can you imagine that makes sense? Two armed federal Marshalls allow themselves to be shot by a carjacker while keeping guns holstered? They step out of the vehicle and let this idiot take it? Does either of those scenarios make any sense?

Yes. The should have let the guys go. They could’ve retrieved the car after they totaled it like everyone else does

That would have jeopardized their ability to do their job -- it's not like they can just take a break from protection to call Uber and run back to headquarters for another vehicle.

Also it is not clear that they shot him to prevent him from taking the vehicle. One of the problems with this scenario is that these guys knew they were armed law enforcement on duty but the carjacker almost certainly didn't. That makes the situation even more charged than it might be if they were just unarmed laypeople -- if at some point he'd seen their weapons and gotten spooked he might be more likely to shoot. That may in fact have been what happened -- he carjacks them unknowingly then realizes they are armed cops and they shoot him before he can do anything even dumber than he's already done. If they'd been regular people the danger of him realizing they have the ability to kill him isn't there and they can more easily just exit the vehicle and let him take it.

They also might have been trigger happy cops. That happens too. But the point is that the scenario cannot play out the way it does with "everyone else" because they fact that they are cops and are armed changes the entire dynamic in a way that makes it more dangerous for all involved.

You forgot the obvious: they had to assume that he might be a threat to Sotomayor. Obviously, taking out her protection makes it easier to get to her. They couldn’t just let him go, how absurd b

She was not home.

[Anonymous]

Democrat run city.

Too bad they didn't take out the trash permanently. The city would have been better off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These takes are weird.

The Marshalls were sitting in a vehicle that almost certainly belongs to the US government (not Sotomayor) when a person approached the vehicle and pointed a gun at them through the window. We don't know if words were exchanged. At some point the Marshalls fired on him. He lived.

He wasn't trying to steal Sotomayor's car and they didn't shoot him to protect her. They shot him because he *was threatening them with a gun.* They shot him before he could shoot them. They were not going to give up the vehicle to him (and they aren't required to omg) and he was absolutely engaged in threatening behavior that justified the use of force.

What other outcome can you imagine that makes sense? Two armed federal Marshalls allow themselves to be shot by a carjacker while keeping guns holstered? They step out of the vehicle and let this idiot take it? Does either of those scenarios make any sense?

Yes. The should have let the guys go. They could’ve retrieved the car after they totaled it like everyone else does

That would have jeopardized their ability to do their job -- it's not like they can just take a break from protection to call Uber and run back to headquarters for another vehicle.

Also it is not clear that they shot him to prevent him from taking the vehicle. One of the problems with this scenario is that these guys knew they were armed law enforcement on duty but the carjacker almost certainly didn't. That makes the situation even more charged than it might be if they were just unarmed laypeople -- if at some point he'd seen their weapons and gotten spooked he might be more likely to shoot. That may in fact have been what happened -- he carjacks them unknowingly then realizes they are armed cops and they shoot him before he can do anything even dumber than he's already done. If they'd been regular people the danger of him realizing they have the ability to kill him isn't there and they can more easily just exit the vehicle and let him take it.

They also might have been trigger happy cops. That happens too. But the point is that the scenario cannot play out the way it does with "everyone else" because they fact that they are cops and are armed changes the entire dynamic in a way that makes it more dangerous for all involved.

You forgot the obvious: they had to assume that he might be a threat to Sotomayor. Obviously, taking out her protection makes it easier to get to her. They couldn’t just let him go, how absurd b

Sure, and it could also be an alien attack

That'd be very poor detective work. Most likely scenario was obvious: one more peaceful carjacking joining the other hundreds we're been enjoying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These takes are weird.

The Marshalls were sitting in a vehicle that almost certainly belongs to the US government (not Sotomayor) when a person approached the vehicle and pointed a gun at them through the window. We don't know if words were exchanged. At some point the Marshalls fired on him. He lived.

He wasn't trying to steal Sotomayor's car and they didn't shoot him to protect her. They shot him because he *was threatening them with a gun.* They shot him before he could shoot them. They were not going to give up the vehicle to him (and they aren't required to omg) and he was absolutely engaged in threatening behavior that justified the use of force.

What other outcome can you imagine that makes sense? Two armed federal Marshalls allow themselves to be shot by a carjacker while keeping guns holstered? They step out of the vehicle and let this idiot take it? Does either of those scenarios make any sense?

Yes. The should have let the guys go. They could’ve retrieved the car after they totaled it like everyone else does

That would have jeopardized their ability to do their job -- it's not like they can just take a break from protection to call Uber and run back to headquarters for another vehicle.

Also it is not clear that they shot him to prevent him from taking the vehicle. One of the problems with this scenario is that these guys knew they were armed law enforcement on duty but the carjacker almost certainly didn't. That makes the situation even more charged than it might be if they were just unarmed laypeople -- if at some point he'd seen their weapons and gotten spooked he might be more likely to shoot. That may in fact have been what happened -- he carjacks them unknowingly then realizes they are armed cops and they shoot him before he can do anything even dumber than he's already done. If they'd been regular people the danger of him realizing they have the ability to kill him isn't there and they can more easily just exit the vehicle and let him take it.

They also might have been trigger happy cops. That happens too. But the point is that the scenario cannot play out the way it does with "everyone else" because they fact that they are cops and are armed changes the entire dynamic in a way that makes it more dangerous for all involved.

You forgot the obvious: they had to assume that he might be a threat to Sotomayor. Obviously, taking out her protection makes it easier to get to her. They couldn’t just let him go, how absurd b

She was not home.

uh oh.

She must not be very happy about the gun violence she's responsible for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gosh what a dumpy neighborhood... makes the Supreme Court look like a letdown.

I guffaw at all you old biddies ridiculing the neighborhood Sotomayor lives in. She's a non-white woman who grew up in the Bronx, can't imagine why she'd find a Class A building located in one of the District's most diverse and exciting neighborhoods appealing. This woman has achieved so much more in her life than you losers, who simply chose the right cock to hop on. Get bent, douchebags.

wow, and here I was thinking that the misogyny was worse on the right than the left. did you really write that? how foul and toxic.