but my interest was in knowing why he felt that he had to do so
There were many, many others there that day, so what was she doing/why was she considered to be such a threat (an unarmed 35 year woman) that the officer in question felt lethal force needed to be used against her?
A) given that a substantial portion of people who participated likely had concealed weapons permits...there was no way of knowing if the person in question was unarmed or not.
B) if you saw someone breaking the window of your house and trying to get in when they weren't supposed to be there, would you be trying to resort to "less-lethal means"?, or would you handle business?
From my own personal perspective, if someone showed up at my door this very moment (with a gang of thugs behind them), busted out the glass, and started trying to get in when they're not invited...I'd have used a similar approach as the officer did in that situation...
- a verbal warning to stop what they're doing and leave the property
- if they keep persisting, a sterner (and much louder) verbal warning with my gun drawn
- if they keep persisting after that.......
This is a double-standard where some people on the right lose me on the topic of policing.
If the narrative for other police shootings is going to be "if they would've complied, they wouldn't have been shot", then that standard needs to be applied consistently.
Every single person who made as far as the interior of the Capitol building refused to obey multiple lawful orders from multiple officers on that day.
Not calling you out in particular, because I'm not familiar with your stance on other police shootings that have happened...
But I've noticed the double-standard where, for other high-profile police shootings that have taken place, the officer playing a game of "lethal hokey pokey" with the perp, issuing numerous conflicting commands, and then wasting the person when they mess up is written off as "they should've followed orders"...yet, because Babbitt happens to agree with them politically, the sentiment seems to be "
she should've been given a 9th chance to obey a lawful command before resorting to lethal force"